Sediment Quality Analysis and Related Management Approaches in Hali- Fax Harbour

Sediment Quality Analysis and Related

Management Approaches in Halifax Harbour

Wenhui Gao

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Marine Management at Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, November 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 1 ABSTRACT ...... 2 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 RESEARCH PURPOSE ...... 2 2. THE BROAD CONTEXT OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ...... 3 2.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ...... 3 2.2 ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES OF CONTAMINANTS ...... 7 3. INTRODUCTION TO HALIFAX HARBOUR...... 11 3.1 OCEANOGRAPHY ...... 11 3.2 HUMAN ACTIVITIES ...... 13 3.3 BIOLOGY ...... 14 3.4 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW ...... 14 3.5 THE SITUATION NOW ...... 18 4. HALIFAX HARBOUR SEDIMENT QUALITY ANALYSIS ...... 20 5. CURRENT GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT EFFORTS ...... 28 5.1 FEDERAL ...... 28 (Source: adapted from Jardine et al. (2003)) ...... 32 5.2 REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL ...... 32 5.3 MUNICIPAL ...... 33 5.4 INTERNATIONAL ...... 33 6. GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES ...... 37 7. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ...... 42 8. CONCLUSION ...... 50 REFERENCES ...... 53 APPENDIX ...... 72

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I want to give my sincere thanks to Dr. Lucia Fanning as my mentor and academic supervisor, for her guidance and assistance with my graduate studies. Without her encouragement and support from the first to the final stages, this project would not have been completed.

Thanks to Dr. Carmen Morales-Caselles for her suggestions and comments that greatly improved the manuscript of this project.

I would also like to show my gratitude to my internship organization, Ocean Pollution Solution team at Vancouver Aquarium for the supports, and to my internship supervisor Dr. Carmen Morales-Caselles and Dr. Peter S. Ross who provided insight and expertise that greatly assisted the research.

I want to thank the faculty members and my classmates in Marine Affairs Program at Dalhousie University for sharing their wisdom with me during the sixteen months. Thanks to all the helps and supports that make me achieve the improvements of my academic studies and feel the warmth in a foreign country.

Thanks to my friends and family for their never changing love.

Gao, W., 2015. Sediment Quality Analysis and Related Management Approaches in Hali- fax Harbour. Halifax, NS: Dalhousie University.

This research is a graduate project at Marine Affairs Program, Dalhousie University. It is also collaborating with the Ocean Pollution Research Program, Coastal Ocean Research Institute, Vancouver Aquarium for the report Emerging Contaminants of Concern in Ca- nadian Harbours: A case study of Halifax Harbour authored by Carmen Morales- Caselles, Wenhui Gao, Peter S. Ross, and Lucia Fanning.

ABSTRACT

Halifax Harbour is one of the world’s deepest harbours (AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011). It is sheltered, spacious, and has minimal currents and tides (Robinson, Hui, Soo, & Hellou, 2009). The ice free port leaves the harbour accessible year round, and it is the closest port of call for ships operating the North Atlantic, Round-the-World and Suez routes (AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011). These advantageous natural conditions have made Halifax Harbour one of the largest commercial ports in Canada and home of Canada’s east coast Navy. In addition to being a major shipping port, industrial centre, naval centre and research centre, Halifax Harbour is surrounded by one of the fastest growing urban regions in Atlantic Canada (Chairpefkon, Thirumurthi, Parker, & Griffiths, 1993). Increasingly, the Harbour’s ecosystems have been placed under stress as a result of intensive human activities along its shorelines. Since the colonization of the area 250 years ago, Halifax Harbour has been a receptacle for raw sewage and industrial wastes (Federico & Henderson, 2001).

Environmental assessments show that acute chemical components in the water and sediments still have great potential hazards to the health of human and biota (AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011). Harbour sediments have historically tended to be hotspots of contamination due to direct and indirect cause related to anthropogenic activities developed in the area such as shipping-related activities, industries, presence of highly populated areas, rivers and other discharges. Dredging and disposal processes can release pollutants bound to contaminated sediments and make them available to the biota.

This research findings will be relevant in assisting with recovery plans for threatened and endangered species frequenting the harbour. It will also provide needed information to assist identified sources of the contaminants to mitigate against the continued pollution of these contaminants into the harbour. Similarly, regulators will be provided with recommendations aimed at improving management of priority contaminants through the use of best practices.

Keywords: Halifax Harbour, sediment quality, contaminants, integrated coastal management, coastal environment

1. INTRODUCTION

Occupying 71% of the Earth’s surface, the ocean has been supporting human activities in a variety of ways, including marine transportation, resource developments, fishing and aquaculture, residential developments, as well as sewage inputs. Starting from the 1860s, with the industrial revolution, human activities expanded to the world of ocean. Within a century, these activities have dramatically changed the characters of the oceans. Marine industry has grown rapidly: maritime transportation of oil has reached more than 2 billion tons annually (El-Said, 2013). For fisheries industries, annual catch of the fish and shellfish is nearly 100 million tons (Stewart & White, 2001; Dahlen, Hunt, Emsbo-Mattingly,

& Keay, 2006), and has become the major source of protein intakes for daily lives. Now- adays, over 60% of the world population lives within 60 km of the sea, and depend directly or indirectly on coastal and marine ecosystem for their livelihood (UNEP-WCMC,

2011; Velmurugan, Swarnam, & Lal, 2015). Along with the development of science and technology, the awareness of health conditions of ocean has increased, especially for the coastal areas along harbour cities.

It is well known that the ocean is linked to the global environment and human activities in various ways. Therefore, a healthy coastal environment is crucial for the health of human and marine biota. In recent decades, among a wide range of global environmental issues, ocean pollution is causing a surge in attention and has become one of the heaviest pressures faced by human beings and the environment.

The importance of sediment quality and its intimate connection to the sustainable coastal environment has been acknowledged and studied since early 1990s (Munawar, Dermott,

McCarthy, Munawar, & Stam, 1999; Crane, 2003; Branch, 2013). In recent years, scientists has revealed the important role played by marine sediments more comprehensively.

Compared to water quality, sediment quality in harbour areas are affecting the health of the coastal ecosystem in a more powerful way (Willford, Mac, & Hesselberg, 1987;

Forbes, Forbes, Giessing, Hansen, & Kure, 1998; Munawar et al., 1999; Ghada Farouk

El-Said, 2013).

1.1 RESEARCH PURPOSE

The purpose of this research is to contribute to the efforts focused on minimizing the level and exposure to contaminants in Halifax Harbour by both humans and marine organisms linked to the harbour environment. This will be done by understanding the importance of sediment quality for a costal ecosystem, analyzing how it is affecting environmental and human health, identifying the potential contributing sources of these contaminants, and the current monitoring and evaluation strategies and governance frameworks aimed at controlling contaminant levels in Halifax Harbour. By analyzing gaps and mismatches in the monitoring strategies for identified priority contaminant, management recommendations will be developed so as to improve the existing governance framework, thereby contributing to the requirement to protect both human health and marine biota using the harbour environment, particularly those that are legally-protected species at risk.

Halifax Harbour is chosen to be the focus of the case study, as it is the major port city on the east coast of Canada with multiple ocean related activities. By identifying potential contributing sources, discussing the impacts of contaminated sediments, and evaluating existing policies and management plans, this research is intended to find management gaps and opportunities to recommend solutions for improvements. Data and information

will be obtained primarily from desktop research (primary, secondary and ‘grey literature’ documentation), supplemented by governmental information on monitoring processes currently in place for assessing and responding to current contaminant levels in the harbour. Research to identify monitoring procedures undertaken in other jurisdictions, such as San Francisco, U.S., will be undertaken to identify best practices which may contribute to recommendations for Halifax Harbour.

2. THE BROAD CONTEXT OF SEDIMENT QUALITY

Prior to discussing the research focus and analysis, it is essential to fully understand the role sediment is playing in a coastal ecosystem by answering the following questions:

Why is sediment important? How can sediment affect environmental and human health?

Where do contaminants come from? What are the priority and new emerging pollutants?

2.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF SEDIMENT QUALITY

First of all, most contaminants released to the water will eventually end up in the sediments. Research and studies using a variety of designs in the field are critical to prioritiz- ing pollutants of concern in contaminated areas, devising mitigation strategies and docu- menting environmental responses (Borja et al., 2004; Morales & Ross, 2015). Sediments have been routinely used to evaluate integrated pollutant inputs into aquatic environments, as they are regarded as both ‘sinks’ and potential ‘sources’ for adjacent food webs (Ad- ams, Kimerle, & Barnett, 1992; Tolun et al., 2001; Moreira, Lima, Ribeiro, & Guilher- mino, 2006; Grant et al., 2011; Burd, Macdonald, Macdonald, & Ross, 2014). Studies show that harmful contaminants, such as pathogens, nutrients, metals, and organic chemicals, tend to sorb onto both inorganic and organic materials that eventually settle and

lead to accumulation in the sediments of rivers, reservoirs, lakes, estuaries, and marine waters (Burton Jr, 2002; Robinson et al., 2009).

Second, there is a variety of ways for humans and the biota to be exposed to the contaminants in sediments. Starting from the benthos from the sediment, contaminants will be accessed through the consumption of seafood and local foods (Kelly & Gobas, 2001;

Koenig et al., 2008; Kelly, Mattson, McDonald, Nielsen, & Weir, 2014). If the loading of these contaminants into the waterways is large enough, the sediments may accumulate excessive quantities of contaminants that directly and indirectly disrupt the ecosystem, causing significant contamination and loss of desirable species (Burton Jr, 2002). The impacts on the ecosystem from sediment-associated contaminant have been found to have a wide range (Burton Jr, 2002), from direct effects on benthic communities (Canfield et al., 1994; Swartz et al., 1994) to substantial contributions to contaminant loads and effects on upper trophic levels through food chain contamination (e.g., for tree swallows,

Bishop, Mahony, Trudeau & Pettit, 1999; McCarty & Secord, 1999; for mink, Foley,

Jackling, Sloan & Brown, 1988; for Caspian terns Ludwig et al., 1993). According to

Mackay (1991) and Burton (2002), “the ecosystem is an interconnected series of path- ways whereby chemical, physical, and biological contaminants move between the four primary compartments of air, surface and ground waters, land, and biota (MacKay, 1991)”

(P.66). Therefore, the sediment quality will eventually affect the health situation of the whole marine ecosystem. More significant harmful effects can be observed at higher tropic levels, such as sharks and marine mammals (killer whales, sea lions, sea otters, etc.). In this sense, tracing and ensuring the quality of the sediments is crucial and fun- damental from a management perspective in order to protect the endangered and threat-

ened marine species listed under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) (EC, 2008). For human health issues, when contaminants bioaccumulate in food sources such as shellfish, trout, salmon or ducks, they pose a threat to human health (El-Said & Draz, 2010; El-Sikaily &

El-Said, 2010; Qiao et al., 2010; US EPA, 2012; El-Said, 2013). Possible long-term effects of eating contaminated fish include cancer and neurological defects (US EPA, 2012).

Therefore, it is highly possible for human and biota to have acute exposures to multiple harbour contaminants in a wide range.

Third, in recent decades, urbanization and the expanding population in coastal areas have increased the sources of pollutants entering harbour environments, triggering more challenges in terms of effective management approaches and risks for environmental health

(McCauley, DeGraeve, & Linton, 2000; Long, 2006). Human activities in coastal areas, such as harbours, usually involve an input of contaminants to the natural environment that becomes evident in the decreased quality of coastal sediments (Morales-Caselles et al., 2008). The importance of the environmental quality of the sediments and its intimate connection to the sustainable coastal environment has been acknowledged and studied since early 1990s (Munawar et al., 1999; Crane, 2003). Five major pollutant sources are: industry, shipping and harbour, agro-forestry, urban developments, and home and garden.

Pollutants such as trace metals, plastics, oils, pesticides, household chemicals herbicides and cleaning agents, Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products (PPCPs), radioactive substances, nutrients and solid waste may come from industry waste discharge, urban sewage, shipping and harbour activities, aquaculture and agriculture, run-offs, as well as tourism businesses among others (Buckley, Smith, & Winters, 1995; Federico & Hender- son, 2001; Dahlen et al., 2006; Ruus et al., 2013). Compared to the low rate of natural

decomposition, the daily metabolic wastes from the cities are far higher than what nature can bear. Moreover, many chemicals will transform or react with each other into more complex and toxic contaminants, which makes it even more difficult to predict and antic- ipate the risk of pollutants (El-Said & Draz, 2010).

Moreover, the effects of sediment contaminants are long-term and chronic (Tueros et al.,

2009; Elhakeem & Elshorbagy, 2013). After World War II, a large number of chemical weapons were dumped and buried into the ocean as a way of disposing of the excess military uses, most of them are along harbour areas (Burton Jr, 2002). It remains unclear the amounts of pollutants released through this type of activities. In addition, prior to 1990s, there was a lack of information and understanding of marine pollution and sediment contamination among researchers and managers. The absence of sewage treatment at the initial period of urbanization has led to the discharge of large amounts of untreated waste waters directly into the ocean. Halifax, for example, did not have any sewage treatment program before 2000 (Buckley et al., 1995; Timoney, 2007), and all of the urban sewage and industrial waste water were poured directly into the harbour without any prior treatment. Once in the water column, contaminants might settle and accumulate into the sediments at certain areas, such as those where the water flows slowly (Burton Jr, 2002).

Studies in these types of lotic systems have detected toxicity in both the bottom and mobile suspended seston components (Munawar et al., 1999). The natural decomposition process takes a long time, and some contaminants such as trace metals and microplastics can be considered as non-degradable. The risk posed by historical contaminated sediments is that they might resuspend due to a storm, a boat propeller or dredging activities

(Carmen Morales-Caselles, Gao, Ross, & Fanning, 2015). The resuspension of contami-

nated sediments into the water column will directly expose other organisms, not just the bottom-dwelling organisms, to toxic contaminants (US EPA, 2012).

Last but not least, up until now, there has not been a completely safe and effective way to purify contaminants from sediments. A variety of remediation technologies exist for cleanup, but they tend to be expensive and the most common method is still dredging

(Averett, Perry, Torrey, & Miller, 1990; Burton Jr, 2002). The downside of this technique is that dredging will disrupt the bottom of the ocean and release a certain amount of contaminants that will become available to other organisms in the aquatic system (Long,

2006; Mamindy-Pajany et al., 2011). Therefore, dredging works may sometimes increase the exposure of human and biota to the contaminants. As such it is important that research and management efforts focus on preventing the contaminants from entering the harbours as a more effective approach.

2.2 ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES OF CONTAMINANTS

In order to solve the problem of tracing and regulating the harbour environment, it is essential to identify and control the sources of pollutants. Five categories of human activities: industry, shipping and harbour, urban, home & garden and agri-forestry cause pollutants to enter terrestrial, atmospheric and marine ecosystems, which then contributed to major sources of sediment contaminants (Shahidul Islam & Tanaka, 2004; Dagnino &

Viarengo, 2014).

Harbour contaminants might include sewage, oil, heavy metals, pesticides, PCBs, radioactive substances, nutrients and solid waste among others (Belan, 2004; Morales-Caselles et al., 2008). Several classes of contaminants have been previously identified as potentially related to port activities, while others may originate from external sources (Table 1).

Table 1: Putative contaminants of concern in a harbour CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN Known – Port related activi- Likely – Port related activi- Likely – external sources ties ties Metals Flame retardants Organochlorine Pesticides Hydrocarbons Perfluorinated compounds Current Use Pesticides Polychlorinated biphenyls Dioxins Pharmaceuticals Organotins (TBT) Furans Personal Care Products Alkylphenols Microplastics Neonicotinoid pesticides Phthalate ester Chlorinated paraffins (Source: Morales-Caselles et al., 2015)

For terrestrial ecosystems, effects are from urban developments, home and garden activities, industrial growth and agri-forestry uses. Related sources including solid contaminants, ground water and upstream water pollutions, run-offs, urban and industrial sewage, pesticides etc., which contains contaminants such as oil, heavy metals, pesticides, Poly- chlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs), PPCPs, radioactive substances and micro-plastics (Belan,

2004; Morales-Caselles et al., 2008). Trace metals might come from industrial pollution such as the burning of coals and municipal waste incinerations (Je, Belan, Levings, &

Koo, 2004). Pesticides and cleaning agents are mainly derived from agriculture, forestry and aquaculture, as well as urban sewage and run-off. Based on the combined drivers of analytical chemistry and emerging toxicity profiles, certain classes of chemicals are increasingly featured within the peer-reviewed literature (Hernández-Arana, Rowden, At- trill, Warwick, & Gold-Bouchot, 2003; Roose, Yocum, & Popelkova, 2011). Attention continues to focus on persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substances and as scientific knowledge advances, the scope of concern goes beyond what it is currently covered by international programs (IMO, 2015a). In recent years, the increasing population and urbanization, PCBs, PPCPs, solid waste, micro-plastics and other substances have increased

dramatically (Federico & Henderson, 2001; Belan, 2004; AMEC Earth & Environmental,

2011; Ruus et al., 2013), leading to higher safety risks for marine environment and human health. Newly emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) still need to be examined for their potential to bioaccumulate and bio- magnify (Lachmuth & Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, 2010; Morales & Ross,

2015). Many of the compounds in these products are common in waste water effluent and may affect the health of living organisms (Appendix 1).

For marine ecosystem, human activities such as aquaculture, shipping and harbour loading, ship painting and cleaning, naval uses, the release of ballast water and dredging works are now seriously affecting the balance of nature (Morales-Caselles et al., 2015).

Hydrocarbon contamination poses a particular concern, especially in areas with high maritime traffic, and has caught the attention of scientists, the public and the social media.

According to statistics, 45% of hydrocarbon inputs in the marine environment come from marine transport whereas 32% are spilled through routinely loading operations and boat cleaning (Morales-Caselles et al., 2008).

All five categories of human activities are going to release pollutants into the atmosphere.

With the emission and dissolve processes, contaminants from the air are about to enter the harbour marine ecosystem and finally end up into the sediments.

For Halifax Harbour, studies show that the main sources of pollution are approximately

100 untreated sewage outfalls that come from private homes, light industry, government and university laboratories, military bases, and hospitals (Buckley et al., 1995; Scott et al.,

2005; Dabbous & Scott, 2012). These outfalls discharge 181 ML/day of organic and inorganic pollutants into the harbor (Halifax Regional Municipality, 2006; Dabbous &

Scott, 2012). PAHs, one of the most widespread organic compounds recorded in the sediments, are considered persistent pollutants with levels above the minimum established by environmental quality guidelines (Tay et al., 1992; Hellou, King, Steller, & Yeats,

2002). It is estimated that the annual input of the heavy metals to Halifax Harbour are as follows: copper (10,700 kg/yr), zinc (36,000 kg/yr), lead (34,600 kg/yr), and mercury

(185 kg/yr). These amounts are among the highest recorded in marine harbors worldwide

(Buckley et al., 1995; Dabbous & Scott, 2012). These contaminants are able to affect the human health and marine biota, and give an odorous smell to the harbor, diminishing its recreational value (Arvai, Levings, Harrison, & Neill, 2002; Halifax Regional Municipal- ity, 2006; Timoney, 2007).

In addition to the three major sources and five categories of human activities, other factors are also drawing scientists’ attentions in recent years. For instance, the effects of global warming including gradual increase of water temperature and ocean acidification, might lead to the release of the contaminants and secondary reactions. (Timoney, 2007;

Morales-Caselles et al., 2015). Many of these contaminants, especially organic components, are potentially able to react with each other in aquatic environment to form new, unpredictable chemicals (Lachmuth & Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, 2010; Mo- rales & Ross, 2015).

Nowadays harbour areas are facing multiple, wide range of challenges. Through the development of comprehensive, high quality and harmonized monitoring, harbours and other hotspots of contamination can provide early warning signs of emerging contaminants in a very useful way. Historical problems combined with newly emerging contaminants makes the coastal environment more vulnerable than ever before, and thus are urgently in

need of better scientific understandings, public awareness, and regulatory approaches

(Lachmuth & Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, 2010; Onorati, Mugnai, Pulcini, &

Gabellini, 2012).

3. INTRODUCTION TO HALIFAX HARBOUR

Halifax Harbour, as one of the most important harbours in Canada, is chosen to be the focus of this research. It is Canada’s major shipping port, industrial centre, naval centre, research centre, and tourism attraction. The harbour ecosystem is highly influenced by multiple human activities, which means that a well-developed coastal management method is crucial for the sustainability of the harbour area.

3.1 OCEANOGRAPHY

Halifax Harbour is one of the world’s deepest harbours at a depth of 18 metres at low tide

(AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011). It is sheltered, spacious, and has minimal currents and tides. The ice free port leaves the harbour accessible year round and it is the closest port of call for ships operating the North Atlantic, Round-the-World and Suez routes (AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011). “The harbor receives a high influx of freshwater from the Sackville River, which flows into the northern end of the Bedford

Basin (Figure 1), and through sewage outfalls along its margins.”(Dabbous & Scott, 2012,

P.188). Because of this influx and the semi-enclosed shape, Halifax Harbour ideally has a two-layered-flow estuarine circulation model in which marine water enters through the harbor mouth below the fresh water that in turn flows over the denser seawater out of the harbor (Figure 2) (Dabbous & Scott, 2012). Stormy weather disrupts this circulation pattern, during which ocean waters will enter near the surface and fresh waters exit near the

bottom (Fader, 2008), especially during tropical storms and hurricanes (Shan, 2010; Dab- bous & Scott, 2012).”

Figure 1. Map showing location, geographic divisions, and water depths of Halifax Harbour (Sources: Fader, 2008; Dabbous & Scott, 2012).

Figure 2. Simplified water circulation model of Halifax Harbour from Bedford Basin to the harbor mouth (Sources: Fader, 2008; Dabbous & Scott, 2012).

3.2 HUMAN ACTIVITIES

The advantageous natural conditions have made Halifax Harbour one of the largest commercial ports in Canada and home of Canada’s east coast Navy (Dabbous & Scott, 2012).

In addition to being a major shipping port, industrial centre, naval centre and research centre, Halifax Harbour is surrounded by one of the fastest growing urban regions in At- lantic Canada (Chairpefkon et al., 1993; AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011). Nova

Scotians and tourists value the Harbour’s recreational opportunities and the aesthetic di- mension it adds to this urban centre. The population of Halifax is booming, year 2007 to

2013 has witnessed the population growth from 223,000 to 504,000 in five years (The

Greater Halifax Partnership, 2014). A 3.8% increase was calculated from year 2001 to

2006, and reached 8.1% from 2005 to 2010 (The Greater Halifax Partnership, 2014).

Shipping activities are also becoming busier. In May 2009, The CKYH Alliance, which are five Southeast Asia shipping lines, commenced service with the Port of Halifax from

Asia, via the Panama Canal, with eight Panamax vessels, which are one of the world’s biggest ships (The Greater Halifax Partnership, 2014). Two major oil companies are put- ting more into offshore exploration in Nova Scotia than any other offshore in the world

(The Greater Halifax Partnership, 2014). In addition, the local businesses have increased and is expected to keep accelerating within 10 years. One of the area’s urban plan including building a vibrant and attractive Regional Centre that attracts $1.5 billion of private investment and 8,000 more residents by 2016 (HRM, 2014). As a result of all these changes, sediment quality and management approaches in Halifax region need to be better examined.

3.3 BIOLOGY

Halifax Harbour is a diverse environment being the home of low trophic-level organisms such as phytoplankton, seaweeds and benthic invertebrates as well as individuals higher in the food chain including fish, birds and marine mammals. In short, this harbour has an extraordinary ecological value. According to related government reports, the harbour environment supports a variety of species at all level, including microbes, plankton, macro- benthos (lobster, mussels, polychaetes, etc.), fish and mammals (HRM & DFO, 2001a,

2001b). The existence of these species highlights the values for coastal biodiversity and for commercial fisheries. Therefore, a biologically healthy harbour represents a healthy harbour ecosystem, as well as healthy food sources for human. However, the Harbour’s ecosystems have progressively been placed under stress as a result of intensive human activity along its shorelines. Since the colonization of the area 250 years ago, Halifax

Harbour has been a receptacle for raw sewage and industrial wastes (Federico & Hender- son, 2001) that has impacted the ecological equilibrium of the area. Studies from 1990s show that the contaminants detected in the organisms are generally below the human health levels (Fournier, 1990; HRM & DFO, 2001b), but further research needs to be done to assess multiple levels of risks after thirty years of developments.

3.4 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

The harbor has been a disposal site for urban waste materials since the founding of the city of Halifax in 1749 (Dabbous & Scott, 2012). Targeting the environmental health of

Halifax Harbour, projects and scientific research have been launched by multiple organizations both governmental and non-governmental.

At the governance level, two main projects were launched in 1990s and the early 2000s for environmental monitoring. In November 1990, the federal and provincial Ministers of the Environment jointly appointed an independent Environmental Assessment Panel to conduct a review of the proposal by Halifax Harbour Cleanup Inc. (HHCI) to design and construct a Halifax-Dartmouth Metropolitan Sewage Treatment Facility (the “Halifax

Harbour Cleanup Project”, also known as Halifax Harbour Task Force) (Chairpefkon et al., 1993). The implementation of this program has made dramatic improvements on the source control of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and other chemical contaminants to Halifax Harbour, and thus has improved the water quality (JWEL, COAI, & ARTM,

2001).

Halifax Harbour started the Harbour Solutions Project in the 2000s. In 2007, the Halifax

Regional Municipality (HRM) began construction of a three-plant treatment system (one in downtown Halifax, downtown Dartmouth, and Herring Cove on the southwest side of the harbor, as well as extensive collector piping to close all sewage outfalls into the harbour and redirect sewage into the treatment plants) to provide advanced primary treatment of the sewage outfalls that pour into the harbour. The three facilities, projected to cost $400 million (Canadian), were expected to improve conditions in the harbor dramatically (Figure 3). The first to open on February 11, 2008, was the Halifax Waste-Water

Treatment Facility (WWTF). “The Halifax plant incurred a massive failure after one year of operation, and raw sewage flowed again into the harbor, causing extensive odor and large floater problems. By June 2010, the three WWTFs were fully operational and began treating sewage” (Dabbous & Scott, 2012, P.189-191). However, other than WWTF, the present operating approaches are still raw and immature. Environmental assessments

show that acute chemical components in the water and sediments still present great potential hazards to the health of human and biota (AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011).

Figure 3. Location of waste-water treatment facilities (WWTFs) in Halifax, Dartmouth, and Her- ring Cove (Sources: Dabbous & Scott, 2012)

At the non-governmental level, much scientific research have been done to address the importance of sediment quality to the harbour environment. The majority of these studies targeted contamination but focused mainly on the geochemistry of the sediments and water analyses (e.g., Buckley, 1989; Winters & Atlantic Geoscience Centre, 1991; Fader &

Buckley, 1995; Williams, 2010). In 1995, Buckley et al., did a historical review of the concentrations of contaminants in sediment samples, and concluded that historical trends in the changing dominance of these environmental factors reflect changes in industrial activity, urban growth, and changes in the use of metals in paints, domestic and industrial chemicals, and in the combustion of fuels (Buckley, Smith & Winters, 1995). Microscale

Toxicity Tests method was explored by Wells et al. in 1996, 1999 and 2001 as a fast and

affordable way to assess the toxicity of harbour sediments (Cook & Wells, 1996; Wells,

1999; Wells, Depledge, Butler, Manock, & Knap, 2001). In the article Trends in the Dis- tribution of PCBs Compared to PACs in Sediments and Mussels of Halifax Harbour and

Distribution of PACs in surficial sediments and bioavailability to mussels, Mytilus edulis of Halifax Harbour, Hellou et al. (2002 a, b) compared the concentration of contaminants in mussels and sediments, and concluded that food could represent a substantial source of contaminants for mussels (Hellou, Steller, et al., 2002; J. Y. Hellou, King, et al., 2002). J.

Hellou et al., (2010) evaluated the wastewater treatment in Halifax Harbour based on the studies of marine sediment chemistries, and concluded that there are no substantially changes on the concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), lead, zinc, and copper in the past two decades, while there are decreases in the concentrations of mercury and increases in the concentrations of alkylated PAHs. In 2012, research on short-term monitoring of Halifax Harbour pollution remediation using benthonic foraminifera as proxies by Dabbous and Scott (2012) show that the inner harbour and North

West Arm of Halifax Harbour is highly polluted, and that even though changes can be detected after the sewage treatment facilities have been built, long-term environmental assessments are still needed. Numerous studies suggested that a baseline is needed for sediment contaminants in Halifax Harbour (Tay et al., 1992; Scott et al., 2005; Robinson

& Hellou, 2009; Robinson et al., 2009); Bioaccumulation factors and long-term risk assessments are suggested in other research (Burton Jr, 2002; McLachlan, Czub, MacLeod,

& Arnot, 2011; Benedetti et al., 2012; El-Said, 2013; Burd et al., 2014). Recent studies done by Mathalon & Hill (2014) aimed at detecting microplastics in Halifax Harbour by

testing mussels, showed that more microplastics were enumerated in farmed mussels compared to wild ones.

3.5 THE SITUATION NOW

In the meantime, related management vulnerabilities are increasingly prominent. Studies show that about 80% of Halifax Harbour sewershed still entered Halifax Harbour untreated (AMEC Earth & Environmental, 2011). Under the present advanced primary sewage operating approach, only the solids are removed, dewatered and transported, other chemical components which are dissolved in the liquid, such as pharmaceuticals and agrochem- icals, are still not well managed (Figure 4). According to Hellou et al. (2010), water quality has improved sufficiently after the launch of waste water treatment facilities in Hali- fax, while no evidence of improvements to marine sediment quality were observed. This indicate the need to monitor sediment quality as part of harbour quality screening programs (Hellou et al., 2010). A study in 2009 indicate that open-ocean conditions in the outer harbour except inside Herring Cove that is polluted by a waste-water outfall discharge of ~15 ML/day, and that little significant environmental change are observed in untreated areas of Halifax Harbour (Robinson & Hellou, 2009; Dabbous & Scott, 2012).

Figure 4. WWTF processes in Halifax Harbour (Source: Williams, 2010)

It is suggested that in order to improve the water and sediment quality in the harbour, it is essential to control and monitor the potential sources (Fournier, 1990). In the case of Hal- ifax Harbour, the multiple uses of harbour areas lead to various potential contaminant sources. Thus comprehensive and systematic management strategies are urgently in need to satisfactorily protect the sediment and water column quality, as well as the public health. However, up until now, depending on the existing policies, the controls of contaminant sources are mainly focusing on land-based pollution, which is important but not enough. Even though it is well studied that shipping is a major source of hydrocarbons and other anthropogenic contaminants, relative regulation approaches are weak. Accord- ing to Stewart and White (2001), “Associated with ship traffic are incidental and accidental releases of hydrocarbons from tank and ballast water clearing and bilge operations; releases of metals from sacrificial anodes (plates of metals such as lead and zinc which corrode preferentially in seawater and leave other ship metal intact) and antifouling paints;

marine litter and garbage disposal from routine disposal from routine disposal practices; and spills of fuel chemicals, and ship debris and cargoes from ship accidents. Accidental releases of hydrocarbons from vessel and tanker traffic account for more hydrocarbons reaching the marine environment than the occasional major oil spills.” (P.20)

In addition, among various shipping activities, the military use of the harbour for navy activities is another important and unique component. Studies show that water and sediments in many bays, harbours and coastal waters used by navies are contaminated with potentially harmful metal and organic compounds (Chadwick & Lieberman, 2009).

These unique conditions of Halifax Harbour discussed above have increased the sensitivity and vulnerability of the Harbour environment, leading to concerns for both the health of the public and the marine biota that frequent the harbour, including any threatened and endangered species that fall under Canada’s Species at Risk Act. However, the existing regulatory approaches in Halifax Harbour have poorly addressed monitoring the contaminants in order to protect the public health or quality of the marine environment.

4. HALIFAX HARBOUR SEDIMENT QUALITY ANALYSIS

Based on the previous studies, the sediment quality in Halifax Harbour is in a process of dynamic change. Even though there is no complete database of sediment contaminants for Halifax Harbour, related information can be collected by the published documents.

The sediment quality analysis in this research summarizes data from previous studies to have an understanding of historical changes and trends (Table 2). To assess the level of contamination, the sediment quality guideline used in the analysis is Sediment Quality

Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life (Freshwater and Marine ISQG/PEL)

(CCME, 1998) from Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), and

Sediment Quality Guideline from Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conser- vation Council (ANZECC) and the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of

Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ) which is the national guideline for sediment quality in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. For Sediment Quality Guidelines for the

Protection of Aquatic Life, ISQG means Interim Sediment Quality Guideline, and PEL is

Probable Effect Level. In ANZECC/ARMCANZ, the two levels, low and high, represents trigger level and high risk level. Further in-situ research is requested when the sediment contaminants reach the trigger level.

Table 2: Inner Harbour Sediment Contaminants in Halifax Harbour, Related Sediment Quality Guidelines and On-Going Activities ISQG-Low Concentration /ISQG-High Environmental Halifax Source of Da- for Human (Australian De- Contaminant Date Quality Guide- Harbour ta Health partment of the line (Canada) (Canada) Environment, 2000) METALS (mg/kg dry wt) Antimony No data 2/25 Tay et al. 0.1 1992 (1992) 400-500 Cadmium 0.4 1999 HRM 0.7/4.2 1.5/10 μg/week 0.34 2010 J. Hellou et al. (2010)a Chromium 28 2010 52.3/160 80/370 Buckley et al. (1995) Pre 1890b 30±8 Tay et al. 1992 100 (marine 53 (1992) 1999 and freshwater Copper 66 HRM 18.7/108 65/270 2010 animal prod- 55 J. Hellou et al. 20th cen- ucts) 100 (2010) turyb Buckley et al. (1995) Buckley et al. Pre 1890 (1995) 5±39 1992 Tay et al. 134 1999 (1992) 0.5 (fish tis- Lead 110 30.2/112 50/220 2010 HRM sue) 68 20th cen- J. Hellou et al. 130 tury (2010) Buckley et al.

ISQG-Low Concentration /ISQG-High Environmental Halifax Source of Da- for Human (Australian De- Contaminant Date Quality Guide- Harbour ta Health partment of the line (Canada) (Canada) Environment, 2000) (1995) Buckley et al. (1995) Pre 1890 0.5±0.4 Tay et al. 1992 0.6 (1992) 1999 0.5 (fish tis- Mercury 0.55 HRM 0.13/0.70 0.15/1 2010 sue) 0.42 J. Hellou et al. 20th cen- 2.9 (2010) tury Buckley et al. (1995) Nickel No data 21/52 Silver No data 1/3.7 Buckley et al. (1995) Pre 1890 101±14 Tay et al. 1992 608 (1992) 1999 100 (fish tis- Zinc 170 HRM 124/271 200/410 2010 sue) 125 J. Hellou et al. 20th cen- 280 (2010) tury Buckley et al. (1995) METALLOIDS (mg/kg dry wt) 5 (Fish Tissue) Tay et al. Arsenic 34 1992 7.24/41.6 3.5 (Fish Pro- 20/70 (1992) tein) ORGANOMETALLICS 23

ISQG-Low Concentration /ISQG-High Environmental Halifax Source of Da- for Human (Australian De- Contaminant Date Quality Guide- Harbour ta Health partment of the line (Canada) (Canada) Environment, 2000) Tributyltin No data 5/70 (μg Sn/kg dry wt) ORGANICS (μg/kg dry wt) Tay et al. Acenapthene <6 1992 6.71/88.9 16/500 (1992) Acenaphthalene 5.87/128 44/640 Tay et al. Anthracene <10 1992 46.9/245 85/1100 (1992) Tay et al. Fluorene 190 1992 21.2/144 19/540 (1992) Tay et al. Naphthalene <10 1992 34.6/391 160/2100 (1992) Tay et al. Phenanthrene <4 1992 86.7/544 240/1500 (1992) Low Molecular Weight No data 552/3160 PAHsb Tay et al. Benzo(a)anthracene 400 1992 74.8/693 261/1600 (1992) Tay et al. Benzo(a)pyrene 690 1992 88.8/763 430/1600 (1992) Tay et al. Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene <1 1992 6.22/135 63/260 (1992) Tay et al. Chrysene <7 1992 108/846 384/2800 (1992) Tay et al. Fluoranthene 1130 1992 113/1494 600/5100 (1992)

ISQG-Low Concentration /ISQG-High Environmental Halifax Source of Da- for Human (Australian De- Contaminant Date Quality Guide- Harbour ta Health partment of the line (Canada) (Canada) Environment, 2000) Tay et al. Pyrene 1450 1992 153/1398 665/2600 (1992) High Molecular Weight No data 1700/9600 PAHs Tay et al. 4370 1992 (1992) Total PAHs No data 4000/45000 4617 2010 J. Hellou et al. (2010)c Total DDT 1.19/4.77 1.6/46 p.p’-DDE 2.07/7.81 2.2/27 o,p’- + p,p’-DDD 2.26/4.79 2/20 Chlordane 0.71/4.3 0.5/6 Dieldrin 2.67/62.4d 0.02/8 Endrin 0.32/0.99 0.02/8 Lindane 21.5/189 0.23/1 0.84 1999 HRM Total PCBs 0.85/21.5 2 (fish tissues) 23/- 0.3 2002 Hellou et al. PCDD/Fs (ng·kg-1 dw) a: data source: mean level of chemical concentrations at location D2 from J. Hellou et al. (2010) b: maximum concentration in 20th century estimated by Buckley et al. (1995) c: data source: total PAH concentrations from station 8 at the depth of 15 meters from J. Hellou et al. (2010) d: Provisional guideline, adoption of freshwater ISQG/PEL (CCME, 1998)

Usually, sediment quality assessments for Halifax Harbour are based on samples from more than five locations. In this research, data are focusing on the chemical concentrations of the inner harbour for the following reasons: 1) water flow and mixture is at medium level which indicates the mean level of geographical situation; 2) it is at the location of cargo ships and cruise ships, so that shipping related activities are able to have impacts on sediment qualities; 3) it is close to the industrial centre of both Halifax and Dartmouth region, with a long history of sewage discharges; 4) it is located next to, but not too close to the sewage treatment facility, which means that the launch of the sewage treatment plans may or may not have impacts on changing the sediment qualities.

These factors make the inner Harbour able to represent the mean level of the sediment situations in

Halifax Harbour.

As shown in Table 2, sediment contaminants at the inner harbour area in Halifax Harbour shows dramatic increases from 1890s to 2000s. For metals and metalloids, the level of Copper, Lead,

Mercury, Zinc, and Arsenic in sediment samples are all above the Interim Sediment Quality

Guideline (CCME, 1998). For organics, Fluorene, Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Fluoran- thene, Pyrene and total PCBs level are above the quality guideline (CCME, 1998), indicating hazards to the health of aquatic environment and humans. Moreover, compared to the quality guideline of Australia and New Zealand, Canadian sediment quality guide shows problems of lacking important chemical data guidelines.

Table 2 also indicates the lack of data for sediment quality. Even though numerous studies have been done to assess the chemical levels in Halifax Harbour, the majority of them are focusing on water quality. While among the studies that focus on sediment quality, different authors adopt different approaches in instrumentation and methodology (Hellou et al., 2010). Several studies collect

sediment samples in the Harbour (i.e. Tay et al., 1992, Buckley et al., 1995; Ginn, Rajaratnam,

Cumming, & Smol, 2015), some are detecting the concentration in benthic organisms (i.e. mussels:

Hellou et al., 2002; foraminifera: Murray, 1971, Dabbous & Scott, 2012; lobster: Buckley et al.,

1989), some are using Microscale Toxicity Tests method(Cook & Wells, 1996; Wells, 1999; Wells et al., 2001). Therefore, it is difficult to get a lineal background information for sediment contaminants to compare with each other. In addition, studies are always focusing on different contaminants. For example, Buckley et al. (1995) and Tay et al. (1992) focus their research on metals, while Hellou et al. (2002) focuses on PACs and PCBs. In summary, individual projects or studies are not able to provide enough information for the general overview for management purposes. A complete baseline or database is in need for scientific references as well as monitoring purposes.

5. CURRENT GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT EFFORTS

The highly integrated harbour activities and the involvement of multiple stakeholders make the situation in Halifax unique and complex. No single government agency is completely responsible for addressing the problem of contaminated sediments. A variety of laws give municipal, regional and provincial, and federal agencies authority to address sediment quality issues. Private industry and the public also have roles to play in contaminated sediment prevention (US EPA, 2012). The following environmental related governance frameworks are contributing to achieve a healthy ecosystem. Even though some are not targeting sediment quality, they are still been concerned in this research as the approaches are able to contribute to sediments indirectly.

5.1 FEDERAL

Multiple federal legislations are related to environmental health. Related government sectors are taking responsibilities and regulations to implement the law and by-laws. At this level, legislation is the major tool to provide guidance. Related legislation and regulation frameworks are listed in Table 3. It shows that the system to ensure human and environmental health in Canada involves multiple agencies, projects and complex policies. Fed- eral department include Environment Canada (EC), Department of Fisheries and Oceans

(DFO), Department of National Defence (DND), Transport Canada (TC), Halifax Port

Authority (HPA), Health Canada (HC). The regulation net is crossing multiple jurisdictions, which shows the need for an efficient collaboration between the agencies.

Table 3: Overview of General Management guidelines for Human Health, Ecological Risk As- sessment, and Their Key Features (Canada) Government Agen- Legislations and Policy Description and key features cy Frameworks The Interdepart- Oceans Action Plan (OAP) It includes federal departments and mental Committees agencies involved in the oceans, to on Oceans promote collaboration, synergies and economics Environment Can- Canadian Environmental Pro- An act respecting pollution prevention ada tection Act (CEPA 1999) and the protection of the environment and human health in order to contribute to sustainable development. The Cana- dian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 came into force on March 31, 2000 and has been updated to include all amendments. Canadian Environmental Qual- ity Guidelines Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) Persistence and Bioaccumula- tion Regulations (2000) Canadian Marine Sediment Quality Guidelines Canadian Freshwater Sediment Quality Guidelines Canadian Sediment Quality Criteria Ontario Ministry of Environ- ment Screening Level Guide- lines Tissue Residue Guidelines Regulations and the Storage of PCB Material Regulations Department of Oceans Act 1997 Three principles: Fisheries and Sustainable development; integrated Oceans management; the precautionary approach (DFO, 2015a) Fisheries Act Key Priorities: Environmental sustainability; economic viability; the inclusion of stakeholders in decision-making processes Species at Risk Act (SARA) To protect wildlife species at risk, including fish, reptiles, marine mammals and molluscs. Aboriginal Fisheries Strate- gy/An Integrated Aboriginal Policy Framework

Government Agen- Legislations and Policy Description and key features cy Frameworks A Fishery Decision-Making Framework Incorporating the Precautionary Approach Policy for Managing the Im- pacts of Fishing on Sensitive Benthic Areas Ecological Risk Assessment Framework (ERAF) for Coldwater Corals and Sponge Dominated Communities Vessel Replacement Rules and Procedures on Atlantic Coast – Discussion Paper Large Ocean Management Ar- LOMAs are established to advance col- eas (LOMAs) laborative management. For each LO- MA, all levels of government, Aborigi- nal groups, industry organizations, environmental and community groups and academia work together to develop a strategic, long-term plan for sustainable management of resources within its boundaries (DFO, 2015b). Marine Protected Areas To protect and conserve: commercial (MPAs) and non-commercial fishery resources and their habitats; endangered marine species and their habitats; unique habitats; marine areas of high biodiversity or biological productivity; any other marine resource or habitat necessary to fulfill the Minister’s mandate Transport Canada Canada Transportation Act The government of Canada’s commit- (2014) ment to meeting the transportation challenges and opportunities of the next decade in a sustainable manner Canada Shipping Act (2001) To protect the health and well-being of individuals, vessels; promote safety in marine transportation; protect the marine environment from damage due to navigation and shipping activities… Marine Environmental Protec- The environmental protection division tion is responsible for the development and management of regulations, guidelines, various official Transport Canada Pub- lications (TPs), programs and initiatives that focus on the prevention of pollution in maritime operations. National Environmental Man- The NEMS includes everything TC do

Government Agen- Legislations and Policy Description and key features cy Frameworks agement System (NEMS) to manage the environmental obliga- tions. By determining and understanding how TC’s operations, services and products impact the environment, objectives and targets to be set to reduce those impacts. Marine Pollution Prevention in the Atlantic Region Canadian Ballast Water Pro- gram Marine Pollution Sources and Air pollution; anti-fouling systems; bal- Regulations last water; garbage; marine pollutants in package form; noxious liquid substances and dangerous chemicals; oil; sewage Canadian Marine Advisory Transport Canada’s national consulta- Council (CMAC) – a member tive body for marine matters. Meetings of the Canadian delegation at are normally held twice a year in the the IMO Marine Environmen- spring and fall, nationally in Ottawa. tal Protection Committee. Canadian Coast Marine Spills Contingency The Canadian Coast Guard is responsi- Guard Plan ble for ensuring the clean-up of all oil, and other noxious substance spills in Canadian waters. Tank truck to marine vessel oil transfer manual CCG Environmental Response Program Natural Resources Natural Resources Canada’s Brings together Canada’s institutional, Canada (NRCan) Adaptation Platform financial and knowledge resources to enable development and widespread use of adaptation information and tools. Canadian Council Canadian Environmental of Ministers of the Guidelines Environment (CCME) Federal Contaminated Sited Action Plan (FCSAP) Health Canada Decision-Making Framework Based on the Framework for Risk Man- (Jardine et al., for Identifying, Assessing and agement (US), replacing the 1990 2003, P.581-582) Managing Health Risks framework (Health Canada, 2000) Health Risk Determination: Used as the model for health risk as- The Challenge of Health Pro- sessment and management by the feder- tection (Health and Welfare al government until 2000 Canada, 1990; Jardine et al., 2003)

Government Agen- Legislations and Policy Description and key features cy Frameworks CSA-Q850 Risk Management: Provides generic guidance to govern- Guidelines for Decision- ment and industry for many types of Makers (Canadian Standards risk Association, 1997) CSA-Z763 Introduction to En- Published as a companion to CSA- vironmental Risk Assessment Q850, and based on CSA-Q634-91; Studies (Canadian Standards stresses that environmental risk assess- Association, 1996) ment is part of good corporate environmental policy CSA-Q634-91 Risk Analysis Developed primarily to address the oc- Requirements and Guidelines cupational risk from exposure to haz- (Canadian Public Health Asso- ardous materials or processes ciation, 1991) Integrated Risk Management Designed to provide guidance to ad- Framework (Treasury Board of vance the use of a more corporate and Canada, 2011) systematic approach to risk management, and to assist public service em- ployees in their decision making (Source: adapted from Jardine et al. (2003))

5.2 REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL

The Government of Nova Scotia is the main actor at this level. In 2010, the Government of Nova Scotia published the document Water for Life: Nova Scotia’s water resource management which aims to integrate different levels of government work. According to the document, the provincial government intends for Nova Scotia to have one of the most environmentally and economically sustainable ways of life in the world by 2020. The water resources in the province can be managed by municipal, provincial, or federal gov- ernments. This creates complex and overlapping responsibilities which can make managing water resources difficult. The water strategy aims to integrate water management to ease this problem. It is proposed in the document Water for Life that Nova Scotia Envi- ronment (NSE) is going to be the leading agency for pollution prevention. The following are the legislation and regulations which govern contaminated sites in Nova Scotia – En-

vironment Act (amendments); Contaminated Sites Regulations; Petroleum Management

Regulations; Environmental Emergency Regulations.

5.3 MUNICIPAL

Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM), specifically the department of Halifax Water, is the leading agency for the sewage treatment project launched in 2000s. It is now playing a role in regulating water quality, “to provide our customers with high quality water, wastewater, and stormwater services” (“Mission Statement | Halifax.ca,” 2015.). Under the regulation of Halifax Water, two programs are launched to improve the system performance, Stormwater Inflow Reduction (SIR) Program for infiltration reduction and Pol- lution Prevention Program for pollution prevention. Related legislation and regulations include Halifax Regional Water Commission Act, Halifax Regional Municipality Charter and Halifax Water Rules and Regulations.

5.4 INTERNATIONAL

At the international level, multiple countries and organizations have contributed their efforts to integrate science and technology into management frameworks and international agreements. International Maritime Organization (IMO), for example, keeps addressing on ocean based environmental issues. Under the regulation of IMO, several international treaties have been signed globally, including “London Convention” and International

Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). The "Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972", the

"London Convention" for short, is one of the first global conventions to protect the marine environment from human activities and has been in force since 1975 (IMO, 2015a).

In 1973, IMO adopted the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from

Ships, now known universally as MARPOL, which has been amended by the Protocols of

1978 and 1997 and kept updated with relevant amendments (IMO, 2015b). The MAR-

POL Convention addresses pollution from ships by oil; by noxious liquid substances carried in bulk; harmful substances carried by sea in packaged form; sewage, garbage; and the prevention of air pollution from ships (IMO, 2015b).

Another significant international agreement is the Stockholm Convention, which is a global treaty to protect human health and the environment from persistent organic pollutants (POPs) (UNIDO, 2015). The Global Environmental Facility (GEF) is the designated interim financial mechanism for the Stockholm Convention (UNIDO, 2015). The United

Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) coordinated the organisation of the Stockholm

Convention, which was originally signed by 92 nations and the European Community on the 23 May 2001 in Stockholm, Sweden (UNIDO, 2015). Over 150 countries signed the

Convention and it entered into force, on 17 May 2004, 90 days after the ratification by the fiftieth country (UNIDO, 2015). The Stockholm Convention established an initial list of 12 key POPs chemicals (the socalled dirty dozen) for which signatories are required to reduce the risks to human health and the environment arising from their release (UNIDO,

2015). Enlisted parties are required to take measures (legal and/or administrative) to eliminate or heavily restrict the production and use of POP pesticides and PCBs, and to minimise the unintentional production and release of POPs (UNIDO, 2015).

Internationally, different countries have developed their own management processes for sediment quality. Good examples can be learned from the U.S., Hong Kong, the Nether- land, Australia and New Zealand, etc. Though there are differences between the methods

adopted by different agencies, Hong Kong, the Netherland, and Australia and New Zea- land are all using “hazard region” and multiple environmental assessment tools instead of a simple hazard guideline (Simpson et al., 2010). In the U.S., the US Environmental Pro- tection Agency (USEPA), National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA), US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), US Geological Survey (USGS) and the Federal Government are now working together to regulate works to ensure a healthy level of sediment quality. The strong multi-governmental management method offers sediment related services in a highly efficient way. San Francisco Public Utilities Com- mission (SFPUC) for example, has developed intergovernmental regulation networks to achieve high standard performances on “Customers, Environment & Natural Resource,

Infrastructure, Community, Governance & Management, Workplace” levels. The success examples will be discussed in details in the recommendation section of this paper. Table

4 lists the overview of general management frameworks internationally. US, Australia, the Netherland, Hong Kong and the UK are listed in the table, since they have developed a relatively mature system for coastal environmental assessment approaches.

Table 4: Overview of General Management Frameworks for Human Health, Ecological Risk As- sessment, and Their Key Features (International)

Framework Description and key features

Framework for Risk Management (U.S. Presi- Perhaps the most influential framework. Con- dential/ Congressional Commission on Risk As- sidered to reflect the international “state of the sessment and Risk Management, 1997) art” in risk management Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Represents the first formalized effort to de- Managing the Process (U.S. National Research scribe the health risk assessment and man- Council, 1983) agement process in a structured way consoli- dates earlier efforts at developing a comprehensive framework, and has since been widely endorsed throughout the world it has been the most influential framework in risk assessment Science and Judgement in Risk Assessment in Expert panel publication characterizing the

Framework Description and key features

(U.S. National Research Council, 1994) scope of judgement and uncertainty involved in risk assessment Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Based on an “analytic-deliberative process” Democratic Society (U.S. National Research for risk characterization Council, 1996) Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment Designed to provide a consistent approach in (U.S. EPA, 1998) the application of U.S. EPA environmental laws Guidelines for Carcinogenic Risk Assessment Designed to set forth principles and proce- (U.S. EPA, 1986) dures to guide U.S. EPA scientists in the conduct of cancer risk assessments, and to inform U.S. EPA decision makers and the public about these procedures Proposed Guidelines for Carcinogenic risk As- Designed to replace 1986 guidelines; under- sessment (U.S. EPA, 1996) went revision in 1999; still considered draft after several years of feedback Risk Characterization Handbook (U.S. EPA, Based on the premise that, to be effective, risk 2000) characterization must be transparent, clear, consistent, and reasonable (TCCR) U.S. DOE Risk Integration Framework (2000) Recognized that the integration of risk information and issues into decision-making and the integration of program activities across various projects and sites are critical to be credibility and accountability o their Envi- ronmental Management Program Integrated Framework for Population Health One of the few frameworks for population Risk Management (Birkwood & Hogan, 1999) health risk assessment and management; includes key aspects from the fields of health promotion Australian/New Zealand Risk Management Jointly developed by Standards Australia and Standard (AZ/NZS 4360) (1999) Standards New Zealand, the standard is intended to provide a “generic guide for the establishment and implementation of the risk management process involving establishing the context and the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, communication and ongoing monitoring of risks” Australian Health and Environmental Health An Australian national approach to environ- Risk Assessment: Guidelines for Assessing Hu- mental health risk assessment; brings together man Health Risks from Environmental Hazards the standard risk assessment components of (2002) issues of identification, hazard assessment,

Framework Description and key features

exposure assessment, risk characterization, and risk management; engagement of stakeholders, risk communication, and community consultation is seen to “envelope” the process Health Council of the Netherlands: Environmen- Conceptual framework for evaluating and de- tal Risk Management Approach (1996) ciding about risks in the Netherlands Hong Kong Interim Sediment Quality Guide- lines (ISQG) United Kingdom Framework for Environmental Based on a tiered approach to environmental Risk Assessment and Risk Management (2000) risk assessment and risk management where the level of effort put into assessing each risk is proportionate to its priority (in relation to other risks) and its complexity (in relation to an understanding of the likely impacts) (Source: adapted from Jardine et al. (2003))

6. GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES a) THE GUIDELINE NEED TO BE UPDATED.

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999) is an important part of

Canada's federal environmental legislation aimed at preventing pollution and protecting the environment and human health. The goal of CCME guideline is to contribute to sustainable development. However, the guidelines and references for current studies are based on documents in the 1990s and early 2000s. This means that related scientific studies are at least 10 years earlier in the 1970s or 1980s. Even though there are some related documents updated in the 2000s under CCME guideline, the Environmental Assessment methods, decision making processes, and guidelines are out of date now.

First, In CCME guideline, the baselines are drawn from benthic organism’s studies, which means that they are not predictive of bioaccumulative effects that may affect high-

er trophic levels (Aldenberg & Jaworska, 2000; Burton Jr, 2002). According to Burton

(2002) “Chemical data (e.g., SQGs) have been the primary decision-making tool, with little or no site validation of biological effects”. In the case of Halifax Harbour, and the connected aquatic systems, it is questioned if the current Canadian guidelines are appro- priate enough for the safety of marine mammals.

Secondly, the guidelines are based on studies of mean diets and mean health level.

Whereas it cannot be well applied to everyone, especially indigenous people who rely for food mostly from the aquatic system. For example the guideline on chemical concentration for human health, individual exposure to Cadmium should be lower than 400-500

μg/week. However, the risks can be different based on diet habits. Therefore, a general sediment quality guideline may not be acceptable for all. In US, studies show that the current Sediment Quality Guideline have errors of 25% or greater (Burton Jr, 2002). In

Canada, studies in British Colombia highlights the need for government agencies to conduct risk assessments and make decisions that are culturally sensitive, requiring a full analysis of the potential exposed populations and how they may be impacted by different management options (Wiseman & Gobas, 2002).

Thirdly, chemicals entering marine ecosystems undergo various weathering processes that may alter their bioavailability and toxicity, reducing the reliability of the chemical approach for assessing environmental quality (Jonker, Brils, Sinke, Murk, & Koelmans,

2006). Coupling exposure and effects lowers the uncertainty in the determination of environmental risks due to contamination (Dagnino et al., 2008; Lyons et al., 2010; Borja et al., 2011; Benedetti et al., 2012; Dagnino & Viarengo, 2014; Morales & Ross, 2015)

Fourth, the guideline is not complete for chemical data. Contaminants such as Antimony,

Nickel, Silver, Tributyltin and total PAHs have no data in the guideline (CCME, 1998).

Others such as Dieldrin has no data for marine environment, so that the guideline is using the data from fresh water, which may be inappropriate. b) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESSES NEED TO UPGRADED

According to Burton (2002), once the chemical contamination concentration reaches a point at which it causes adverse effects to biota, it is considered polluted. The question then comes to what exactly is the “point”? The reference level for sediment contaminants varies from place to place. Scientific research also does not have a unified standard, so that results and conclusions can be very different, especially when the concentration of sediment contaminants are at a relatively low to middle level (Arblaster, Ikonomou, &

Gobas, 2015). In addition, the bioaccumulation rate can be different depend on specific situations, so that a precise evaluation should depend on more in-depth analyzes (Bakke,

Källqvist, Ruus, Breedveld, & Hylland, 2010; Arblaster et al., 2015). According to

Munawar et al. (1999), three reasons make the risks of sediment contaminants different from one place to another: “1) the complex geochemistry of sediment makes understanding chemical speciation and kinetics difficult; 2) aquatic organisms interact with the sediment in a myriad of ways, influencing contaminant fate and their own exposure to the pollutants; 3) biological variability is substantial due to numerous biochemical responses that occur once the contaminant has entered the organism, making simple assumptions based on sediment contaminant analysis difficult” (P.368). This means that a general reference level may not be suitable for each case, and that referencing only general guidelines can cause serious mistakes. Burton Jr (2002) argues that SQGs may not be accurate-

ly developed for national and wide geographic areas; rather, they will be most useful on a site-specific basis where they can be optimized and verified through multiple assessment approaches. Therefore, only by the use of multiple assessment approaches can accurate assessments be conducted where the likelihood of false positive and false negative conclusions is rare (Burton Jr, 2002).

For Halifax Harbour, the large volume of daily water exchanges and the pattern of turbu- lent flow is able to bring fresh water into the harbour every day. The physical condition like this can also affect the bioaccumulation rate, and makes it complicated for environmental risk assessments. For example, when the water flows slow, and the bioaccumulation rates are higher, same amount of contaminants can have a much higher possibility to flow into the food web and then threaten biotas and human beings. In other words, the same level of contaminates in sediments, if located in different coastal systems, can have very different consequences. In this way, one general environmental assessment can lead to miscalculations and cause poor decisions to be made. c) CURRENT REGULATORY NETWORK IS NOT VERY WELL DEVELOPED

The health of the harbour indicates good water quality, sediment quality, shipping activities, industrial developments, food safety issues, well managed aquaculture and agriculture, navy uses, and public behaviours. While all of these are under the regulation of different government sectors, they are not strongly combined and connected. As discussed above, there in not a regulatory network nor influential information exchanges among multiple government departments and other stakeholders currently for Halifax Harbour.

The overlap of authority is causing the entire system to be inefficient, making it difficult for problem solving. This phenomenon can also lead to other problems, such as government departments “passing the buck” to each other when it comes to environmental issues. d) PUBLIC AWARENESS AND STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN HALIFAX ARE LOW.

In Canada, when it comes to pollution problems, most of the effect (especially relating to government assessment) is aimed at water quality, while less attention is being paid on assessing sediment quality (Borja et al., 2004). Especially for the public, sediment quality is not considered as important as water quality, which reflects the low awareness of the public and an urgent need of further outreach and education approaches. e) WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES NEED TO BE UPGRADED

In Halifax, most works that have been done focused mainly on industrial and urban sewage treatments. Even though after the two environmental programs (Halifax Harbour

Task Force and Halifax Solutions Project), the inner harbour showed environmental improvements during the treatment period, other areas show little significant environmental change (Dabbous & Scott, 2012). Moreover, the Waste Water Treatment Facilities processes are now limited to advanced primary treatment method (Dabbous & Scott, 2012), during which only the solids are removed, dewatered and transported, other chemical components which dissolved in the liquid. Pollutants such as pharmaceuticals and agro- chemicals are still not well managed. f) LACK OF DATABASE AND BASELINE INFORMATION

Baseline information and a database is lacking in Halifax Harbour. Although scientific research has been done by independent programs, the lack of database is a great hazard for future developments. The importance of a database has been examined in other cases.

For example, in April 2015, a serious oil spill happened in Vancouver Harbour, and the regional ecosystem was effected. The lack of a baseline has made many related environmental assessment work hard to process. It is difficult to measure the damage caused by the oil spill because there are no baselines to be compared to. The lack of baseline information also makes it hard to trace the source of the pollutant. Though some modern technologies have been developed to trace the sources, no work can be done without the baseline sediment data. Therefore, the lack of database makes it difficult for tracing pollutions.

Same problem exists in Halifax Harbour. Thus it is urgent to establish a chemical database for information storage, to avoid the mistakes that happened in other areas.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS

In this section, several recommendations are raised for the further development of Hali- fax Harbour based on the gaps and opportunities discussed above. Efforts from all involved stakeholders are in need to achieve the goal of sustainable development. No single government department or organization can do it alone. The suggestions involve multiple levels of management. For an integrated coastal management network, top-down approaches should combine with bottom-up approaches to form an efficient and effective system. This can be accessed by three major approaches: regulatory network, best practices, and outreach and education.

a) LEGISLATION – USE MULTIPLE TOOLS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DECISION

MAKING

The CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment) guideline is the most important piece of environment legislation in Canada for many years and will substantially influence the environmental regulation of chemicals, including human and veterinary pharmaceuticals. As the major document that guides sediment quality, CCME guideline should be updated based on recent studies. Based on the gaps and problems discussed above, related changes such as bioaccumulation factors and a complete chemical monitoring database should be added in the document.

It is suggested that sediment quality guidelines be used for screening in conjunction with other assessment methods (Brown, 2002; Grifoll, Jordà, Borja, & Espino, 2010; Grifoll,

Jordà, Espino, Romo, & García-Sotillo, 2011; Grifoll et al., 2013). Although it is appar- ent that national guidelines will continue to improve in accuracy and applicability in geographic areas around the world, they will probably always be relegated to be used as screening tools, given the complexity of sediments and mixture interactions (Burton Jr,

2002). Referencing from Hong Kong, the Netherland, and Australia and New Zealand, one effective way to solve this problem is to use an area of uncertain toxicity instead of a solid standard. In this way, a low and severe effect threshold was set. The range of concentrations between the two was deemed an area of uncertain toxicity, and therefore further biological testing was required before the sediment could be classified as a hazard

(Burton Jr, 2002; Wenning, 2005). For a contaminated area that is higher than the low threshold, further monitoring programmes will test factors including. Thus, ideally, investigations should combine assessments of persistence, laboratory and in situ toxicity and

bioaccumulation testing, toxicity, hydrodynamic characterization (low vs. high flow, surface-ground water transition zones), relevance at the large scale (river basin, high fluxes

(tendency to increase concentrations/ fluxes on a long-term basis), habitat analyses, and addition or replacement of pollutants (Burton Jr, 2002; Brils, 2008; He, Peng, Zhai, &

Xiao, 2011). Only with these multiple tools and an understanding of their interactions can reliable determinations of sediment pollution and long-term consequences be made (Bur- ton Jr, 2002). Then cost-effective, environmentally protective management decisions can be made about the type, extent, and need for sediment remediation (Burton Jr, 2002).

For environmental assessment, a comprehensive tool that combines water quality and sediment quality assessment, uncertain toxicity, and bioaccumulation factors to identify the situation of contaminated sites is suggested (Borja et al., 2004; Droppo, Krishnappan,

Liss, Marvin, & Biberhofer, 2011; Furlan, Poussin, Mailhol, Le Bissonnais, & Gumiere,

2012; Tixier, Rochfort, Grapentine, Marsalek, & Lafont, 2012). In Australia and New

Zealand, the ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) guidelines, a similar method is adopted. It indicates that lower SQG values were termed “trigger values” to imply that further action is triggered if the values are exceeded (Australian Department of the Environment, 2000;

Wenning, 2005). The upper values (termed “interim SQG-high”) were, however, includ- ed in the guideline documentation to provide an indication of a value at which toxicity is more likely (Wenning, 2005).

For decision making processes, it is argued that ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) guidelines is currently the best approach to assessing sediment quality (Wenning, 2005). This can be achieved by extending the current ANZECC/ARMCANZ decision framework to include bioaccumulation and ecological assessments, or by combining these and other factors in

an integrated framework. Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the Environmental Assessment in the Netherland and Decision Making processes adopted in ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) guideline. The common theme of these two is addressed in the multiple assessment approaches that include in-situ assessments, bioaccumulation factors, and detailed and spe- cial analysis, which can increase the accurate rates of environmental assessments.

Figure 5: Derivation of sediment quality criteria in the Netherlands (Reprinted from Water Re- search 25(6), Van Der Kooij et al., Deriving quality criteria for water…, p 679-705, copyright 1991, with permission from Elsevier). BCF = bioconcentration factor; Ci = concentration in medium i; w = water; org = organism; s = sediment particle; Ksw = partition coefficient between sediment and water

Figure 6: Hierarchical assessment of contaminated sediments (Ahlf, Hollert, Neumann-Hensel, & Ricking, 2002) b) REGULATION – USE COLLABORATION AS A MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

The regulatory approaches for a healthy sediment quality involves multiple levels of stakeholders. From the governance perspective, federal, regional and provincial, and municipal government departments share responsibilities on environmental issues. Related departments include but not limited to Halifax Regional Municipality, Halifax Port Au- thority, Nova Scotia Environment, Industries Canada, Environmental Canada, Transport

Canada, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Department of National Defence, Health

Canada, and US Coast Guard. Other non-governmental stakeholders include universities,

Non-Governmental Organizations, as well as industrial companies that are using the coastal resources. Therefore, it is crucial for the stakeholders to collaborate at all levels for sustainable harbour development. An integrated coastal zone management method is

ideal to achieve this goal (Souchère et al., 2010; Spencer, Droppo, He, Grapentine, & Ex- all, 2011; Tiller, Brekken, & Bailey, 2012). San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

(SFPUC, 2014) has developed a multi-governmental management method, which is one of the most advanced system in the world, and thus is recommended in this research to be referenced for regulating Halifax Harbour. Even though the legislation and political environment are different in Canada, much can be learned from SFPUC’s successful cases.

In the case of SFPUC, the agency is a multi-governmental department, which is responsible for all water related activities at multiple levels. At the governmental level, it launch- es programs to improve the quality of drinking water and the health of urban watersheds, monitors ocean and beaches, supports clean energy developments, regulates San Francis- co shipyards, and manages sewage treatment facilities. At the community level, it works closely with local groups to engage the public for pollution prevention projects such as

Pollution Prevention Calendar, Only Rain Down the Drain, Cooking Oil Recycling, To

Flush or Not to Flush?, Expired Medications, Less-Toxic Products, Garden Workshops,

Classroom Presentations, Proper Copper. The active media team and outreach programs make the society work efficiently for the bottom-up approaches.

The SFPUC also publishes annual reports to analyze its sustainability performance. It uses six major categories to frame its Strategic Sustainability platform, which are Custom- ers, Community, Environment & Natural Resources, Governance & Management, Infra- structure & Assets, and Workplace. Detailed criteria is highlighted for each category.

Each year, the committee examines its performances by analyzing data and doing surveys, and summarize them by using scoring scale of 1 to 5 (best). By comparing with former years’ performances and the target goals, the Committee is able to understand how well it

worked in the past year and where to improve for the upcoming years. All the data and reports are accessible by the public. By using this method, the overall performance of

SFPUC is showing a positive trend in the past five years.

SFPUC is a successful case that can be referenced to form a regulation framework in Hal- ifax Harbour. The unique cultural, environmental, and economical background of Halifax

Harbour makes it urgently in need of an efficient management system to achieve sustainable coastal development goals. The barrier of achieving this strategy may be the lack of political will and financial support. Under this circumstance, Nova Scotia Environment or

Halifax Water is potentially suitable for acting as a leading agency to form the multi- governmental framework. c) BRIDGE THE DATA AND KNOWLEDGE GAP

The importance of building a database is well accepted. According to Tay et al. (1992),

“without collection of baseline data, including biological response studies, it is impossi- ble to monitor the results of any population control programs designed to clean up the marine environment” (P. 1579). The situation of Halifax Harbour is changing in a dramatic way. During the past decade, the population has doubled, shipping activities is becoming more active, and economic is increasing with the urban development. All these changes have the potential to affect the sediment quality. Without a baseline, it is difficult to analyze the impacts of human activities on marine contamination situations. At this point, Environment Canada should be the leader for data collection and the establishment of a systematic database.

As discussed, in Table 2, the lack of data makes it difficult to compare the sediment qualities during the past centuries. Separate individual projects are not comprehensive enough for environmental assessments or decision makings. A complete database with Geograph- ical Information System (GIS) for sediment contaminants in Halifax Harbour is urgently in need. In this case, DFO can be the leader for data collections and regular monitoring activities. Once the systemic database is established, regular monitoring work (i.e. seasonal or yearly) should follow up to keep the database updated. Only in this way, information can be used for further regulatory approaches such as environmental assessments, risk assessments, and coastal development plans. d) CULTURAL CHANGES – OUTREACH AND PUBLIC EDUCATION

Increasing public awareness of the problem is crucial to developing an effective solution

(US EPA, 2012). According to McKenzie-Mohr (2000), changing individual behavior is central to achieving a sustainable future. In some cases, in addition to legislation, regulation and scientific approaches, sustainable urban environment can be achieved more efficiently with the supports of the public. Unlike policy and legislation approaches, which are in need of complex processes and government approvals, outreach activities can be achieved in multiple ways (Greiner, 2014).

In Halifax region, the education organizations that have ocean education programs include universities, the Discovery Centre, and other NGOs. However, as a coastal city and one of the most important port harbours in Canada, Halifax is not the leader of sediment quality education. The public lacks awareness of the importance of sediment quality. Wa- ter is recognized as a vital ingredient to a healthy and prosperous economy, however, lit-

tle public awareness is focusing on the sediment quality. Most sediment related works are limited in scientific research and academic levels.

Traditional education programs, such as school programs and NGO outreach events are the most popular ways to increase the public awareness and to change individual behaviours. In addition to this, educators can be more creative to find more effective ways for public education (McKenzie-Mohr, 2000). This can be practiced by using multiple tools such as marketing based instruments and social media outreach. For example, one successful case of using marketing based instruments is environmental certifications (i.e. sustainable seafood, sustainable wood products). This method can be addressed for products such as Personal Care Products which can contain toxic chemicals. In addition to using environmental labeling, smart phone Apps are also valuable as they are playing important roles in public outreach, especially for youth and teenagers. Think Dirty for example, is one smart phone App that can simply show customers the harmful chemicals in beautiful products by scanning the QR code. Think Dirty will pull up a “dirty meter,” which gives users a health impact rating between zero (harmless) and 10 (serious health impact) on each rated category. From there, users can check out the ingredient list on a particular product, and find out what each is used for and why is a threat to health. With the increasing users of the App, more customers tend to purchase “safe” products. In this way, health product companies tend to change because of the market pressure.

8. CONCLUSION

In summary, ensuring sediment quality is crucial for a healthy harbour environment. Sed- iments are supporting the coastal ecosystem, acting as the source of contaminants, and

being used by scientists as a critical tool for environmental behaviours. Sediment quality is affecting human and biota in a variety of ways. Harmful contaminants can enter the food web and accumulate in the body of coastal organisms; long term and chronic effects are potential hazards for the environmental health; indigenous people have a higher risk to be exposed to the contaminants. As a key player in the harbour ecosystem, sediment can be easily affected by human activities from water, territory and atmosphere related activities, which makes the health of sediment fragile.

From the perspective of legislation, Canada, the CCME guideline is out dated and problematic. Scientific research show that a simple guideline that does not consider bioaccumulation factors, geographic differences, diverse diet behaviours and long-term effects is not accurate enough to make conclusions on sediment quality. From a regulation perspective, as a fast growing coastal area, Halifax Harbour is lacking of efficient networks that integrate multiple government departments, non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders. From the perspective of science and technology, the effectiveness of sewage treatment facilities for Halifax is questionable; the absence of sediment quality monitoring and a chemical database is a potential hazard for future harbour developments and environmental assessments. Moreover, the community level, the education and outreach approaches are weak in increasing the public awareness of the importance of sediment quality, and changing individual behaviours that have impacts on the harbour environment.

After analyzing the importance of the sediment quality, the legislative environment in

Canada, and the specific case of Halifax Harbour, this research suggested several ways to improve for sustainable developments in the region of Halifax. Targeting the legislation

issue, referenced from successful cases from other countries, this research suggests that

CCME guideline and other related documents should be updated by using multiple tools for Environmental Assessments and Decision Making processes. In order to improve the regulation approaches, this research recommends a multi-governmental network should be established. An active management system can be referenced from the case of San

Francisco Public Utilities Commission. For science and technology developments, the sewage treatment facilities may need to be upgraded; a comprehensive database urgently needs to be established. Last but not least, it is crucial to increase the public awareness on the issue of sediment quality. The public should know more about the importance of sediment quality, and learn in what ways they can participate to become more environmental friendly. Such cultural changes can be achieved by using multiple and creative outreach methods.

The sustainable development of Halifax Harbour and a healthy sediment quality involves stakeholders multiple levels and perspectives. It is important to realize that active partici- pations of all stakeholders, the government departments to the individuals, is the key for a balanced coastal management system. This research suggests that the changing of the political and social environment is urgently in need for ensuring the sediment quality, protecting the whole coastal ecosystem, as well as benefiting the human interests.

REFERENCES

Adams, W. J., Kimerle, R. A., & Barnett, J. W. (1992). Sediment quality and aquatic life assess-

ment. Environmental Science & Technology, 26(10), 1864–1875.

http://doi.org/10.1021/es00034a001

Ahlf, W., Hollert, H., Neumann-Hensel, H., & Ricking, M. (2002). A guidance for the assessment

and evaluation of sediment quality a German Approach based on ecotoxicological and

chemical measurements. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2(1), 37–42.

http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02991249

Aldenberg, T., & Jaworska, J. S. (2000). Uncertainty of the Hazardous Concentration and Fraction

Affected for Normal Species Sensitivity Distributions. Ecotoxicology and Environmental

Safety, 46(1), 1–18. http://doi.org/10.1006/eesa.1999.1869

AMEC Earth & Environmental. (2011). Halifax Harbour Water Quality Monitoring Program Final

Summary Report. Retrieved from

http://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/documents/HHWQMPFinalSummaryReport.pdf

Arblaster, J., Ikonomou, M. G., & Gobas, F. A. (2015). Toward ecosystem-based sediment quality

guidelines for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Integrated Environmental Assessment

and Management, 11(4), 689–700. http://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1638

Arvai, J. L., Levings, C. D., Harrison, P. J., & Neill, W. E. (2002). Improvement of the sediment eco-

system following diversion of an intertidal sewage outfall at the Fraser river estuary,

Canada, with emphasis on Corophium salmonis (amphipoda). Marine Pollution Bulletin,

44(6), 511–519. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(01)00264-8

Australian Department of the Environment. (2000). Australian and New Zealand guidelines for

fresh and marine water quality: Volume 1 - The guidelines [Text]. Retrieved November 5,

2015, from https://www.environment.gov.au/water/quality/publications/australian-

and-new-zealand-guidelines-fresh-marine-water-quality-volume-1

Averett, D. E., Perry, B. D., Torrey, E. J., & Miller, J. A. (1990). Review of Removal, Containment

and Treatment Technologies for Remediation of Contaminated Sediment in the Great

Lakes.

Bakke, T., Källqvist, T., Ruus, A., Breedveld, G. D., & Hylland, K. (2010). Development of sediment

quality criteria in Norway. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 10(2), 172–178.

http://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-009-0173-y

Belan, T. A. (2004). Marine environmental quality assessment using polychaete taxocene charac-

teristics in Vancouver Harbour. Marine Environmental Research, 57(1–2), 89–101.

http://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-1136(03)00062-X

Benedetti, M., Ciaprini, F., Piva, F., Onorati, F., Fattorini, D., Notti, A., … Regoli, F. (2012). A mul-

tidisciplinary weight of evidence approach for classifying polluted sediments: Integrating

sediment chemistry, bioavailability, biomarkers responses and bioassays. Environment

International, 38(1), 17–28. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2011.08.003

Bishop, C. A., Mahony, N. A., Trudeau, S., & Pettit, K. E. (1999). Reproductive success and bio-

chemical effects in tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) exposed to chlorinated hydro-

carbon contaminants in wetlands of the great lakes and st. lawrence river basin, USA

and Canada. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 18(2), 263–271.

http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620180224

Borja, Á., Galparsoro, I., Irigoien, X., Iriondo, A., Menchaca, I., Muxika, I., … Zorita, I. (2011). Im-

plementation of the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive: A methodological

approach for the assessment of environmental status, from the Basque Country (Bay of

Biscay). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 62(5), 889–904.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.03.031

Borja, A., Valencia, V., Franco, J., Muxika, I., Bald, J., Belzunce, M. J., & Solaun, O. (2004). The

water framework directive: water alone, or in association with sediment and biota, in

determining quality standards? Marine Pollution Bulletin, 49(1–2), 8–11.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2004.04.008

Branch, L. S. (2013, October 9). Consolidated federal laws of canada, Harbour Commissions Act.

Retrieved May 6, 2015, from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/H-1/FullText.html

Brils, J. (2008). Sediment monitoring and the European Water Framework Directive. Annali

dell’Istituto Superiore Di Sanità, 44(3), 218–223.

Brown, K. (2002). Making waves integrating coastal conservation and development. London ;

Sterling, VA: Earthscan.

Buckley, D. E., Smith, J. N., & Winters, G. V. (1995). Accumulation of contaminant metals in ma-

rine sediments of Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia: environmental factors and historical

trends. Applied Geochemistry, 10(2), 175–195. http://doi.org/10.1016/0883-

2927(94)00053-9

Buckley, Hargrave, & Nicholls (Editor), H. B. (1989). Investigations of Marine Environmental

Quality in Halifax Harbour (Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences

No. No. 1693). Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia: Fisheries

and Oceans. Retrieved from

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/273138802_Buckley_and_Hargrave_(1989)_

Geochemical_characteristics_of_surface_sediments_p._4-

31._Can._Tech._Rep._Fish._Aquat._Sci._1693

Burd, B. J., Macdonald, T. A., Macdonald, R. W., & Ross, P. S. (2014). Distribution and Uptake of

Key Polychlorinated Biphenyl and Polybrominated Diphenyl Ether Congeners in Benthic

Infauna Relative to Sediment Organic Enrichment. Archives of Environmental Contami-

nation and Toxicology, 67(3), 310–334. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-014-0017-7

Burton Jr, G. A. (2002). Sediment quality criteria in use around the world. Limnology, 3(2), 65–76.

http://doi.org/10.1007/s102010200008

Canadian Public Health Association. (1991). Risk analysis requirements and guidelines (CAN/CSA-

Q634-91).

Canadian Standards Association. (1996). Introduction to environmental riskk assessments stud-

ies (SCA-Z763-96).

Canadian Standards Association. (1997). Risk management: Guidelines for decision-makers.

(CAN/CAS-Q850-97).

Canfield, T. J., Kemble, N. E., Brumbaugh, W. G., Dwyer, F. J., Ingersoll, C. G., & Fairchild, J. F.

(1994). Use of benthic invertebrate community structure and the sediment quality triad

to evaluate metal-contaminated sediment in the upper clark fork river, montana. Envi-

ronmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 13(12), 1999–2012.

http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620131213

CCME. (1998). CCME Summary Table. Retrieved November 4, 2015, from http://st-

ts.ccme.ca/en/index.html?chems

Chadwick, B., & Lieberman, S. (2009). Quantifying In Situ Metal and Organic Contaminant Mobil-

ity in Marine Sediments.

Chairpefkon, S., Thirumurthi, D., Parker, R., & Griffiths, L. (1993). Report of the Federal-Provincial

Environmental Assessment Review Panel for the Halifax-Dartmouth Metropolitan

Wastewater Management System (No. EN1 06-20/1993E). Federal Environment As-

sessment Review Office: Environment Canada. Retrieved from

https://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/documents/HHCIPanelReport.pdf

Cook, N. H., & Wells, P. G. (1996). Toxicity of Halifax Harbour sediments: An evaluation of the

Microtox Solid Phase Test. Water Quality Research Journal of Canada, 31(4), 673–708.

Crane, M. (2003). Proposed development of Sediment Quality Guidelines under the European

Water Framework Directive: a critique. Toxicology Letters, 142(3), 195–206.

http://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4274(03)00069-9

Dabbous, S. A., & Scott, D. B. (2012). Short-Term Monitoring of Halifax Harbour (nova Scotia,

Canada) Pollution Remediation Using Benthonic Foraminifera as Proxies. The Journal of

Foraminiferal Research, 42(3), 187–205. http://doi.org/10.2113/gsjfr.42.3.187

Dagnino, A., Sforzini, S., Dondero, F., Fenoglio, S., Bona, E., Jensen, J., & Viarengo, A. (2008). A

weight‐of‐evidence approach for the integration of environmental “triad” data to assess

ecological risk and biological vulnerability. Integrated Environmental Assessment and

Management, 4(3), 314–326. http://doi.org/10.1897/IEAM_2007-067.1

Dagnino, A., & Viarengo, A. (2014). Development of a decision support system to manage con-

tamination in marine ecosystems. Science of The Total Environment, 466–467, 119–126.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.06.084

Dahlen, D., Hunt, C., Emsbo-Mattingly, S., & Keay, K. (2006). Are toxic contaminants accumulat-

ing in Massachusetts coastal sediments following startup of the Massachusetts Bay out-

fall: A comprehensive comparison of baseline and post-diversion periods. Marine Pollu-

tion Bulletin, 52(11), 1372–1388. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2006.03.023

DFO. (2015a). Governance for Sustainable Marine Ecosystems. Retrieved June 24, 2015, from

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans/management-gestion/integratedmanagement-

gestionintegree/Governance-eng.htm

DFO. (2015b). Large Ocean Management Areas. Retrieved June 24, 2015, from http://www.dfo-

mpo.gc.ca/oceans/marineareas-zonesmarines/loma-zego/index-eng.htm

Droppo, I. G., Krishnappan, B. G., Liss, S. N., Marvin, C., & Biberhofer, J. (2011). Modelling sedi-

ment-microbial dynamics in the South Nation River, Ontario, Canada: Towards the pre-

diction of aquatic and human health risk. Water Research, 45(12), 3797–3809.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.04.032

EC. (2008, October 2). Species at Risk Act - Enforcement - Environment Canada. Retrieved No-

vember 3, 2015, from https://www.ec.gc.ca/alef-

ewe/default.asp?lang=en&n=ED2FFC37-1

Elhakeem, A., & Elshorbagy, W. (2013). Evaluation of the long-term variability of seawater salini-

ty and temperature in response to natural and anthropogenic stressors in the Arabian

Gulf. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 76(1–2), 355–359.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.08.036

El-Said, G. F. (2013). Bioaccumulation of Key Metals and Other Contaminants by Seaweeds from

the Egyptian Mediterranean Sea Coast in Relation to Human Health Risk. Human and

Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 19(5), 1285–1305.

http://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2012.708253

El-Said, G. F., & Draz, S. E. O. (2010). Physicochemical and geochemical characteristics of raw

marine sediment used in fluoride removal. Journal of Environmental Science and Health,

Part A, 45(12), 1601–1615. http://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2010.506117

El-Sikaily, A., & El-Said, G. F. (2010). Fluoride, Some Selected Elements, Lipids, and Protein in the

Muscle and Liver Tissues of Five Fish Species along the Egyptian Mediterranean Sea

Coast. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 16(6), 1278–

1294. http://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2010.526500

Fader, G. B. J., & Buckley, D. E. (1995). Environmental Geology of Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia.

Geoscience Canada, 22(4). Retrieved from

https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/GC/article/view/3885

Federico, R., & Henderson, J. (2001). Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment Halifax

Harbour Solutions Project (No. NSD13960-6029). Retrieved from

http://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/documents/health_risk_assessment_001.pdf

Foley, R. E., Jackling, S. J., Sloan, R. J., & Brown, M. K. (1988). Organochlorine and mercury resi-

dues in wild mink and otter: Comparison with fish. Environmental Toxicology and Chem-

istry, 7(5), 363–374. http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620070506

Forbes, T. L., Forbes, V. E., Giessing, A., Hansen, R., & Kure, L. K. (1998). Relative role of pore wa-

ter versus ingested sediment in bioavailability of organic contaminants in marine sedi-

ments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 17(12), 2453–2462.

http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620171211

Fournier, R. (1990, August 3). Halifax Harbour Task Force (Final Report). Halifax’s Municipal Gov-

ernment. Retrieved from

https://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/documents/FournierHalifaxHarbourTaskForceFinalR

eport1990.pdf

Furlan, A., Poussin, J.-C., Mailhol, J.-C., Le Bissonnais, Y., & Gumiere, S. J. (2012). Designing man-

agement options to reduce surface runoff and sediment yield with farmers: An experi-

ment in south-western France. Journal of Environmental Management, 96(1), 74–85.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.11.001

Ginn, B. K., Rajaratnam, T., Cumming, B. F., & Smol, J. P. (2015). Establishing realistic manage-

ment objectives for urban lakes using paleolimnological techniques: an example from

Halifax Region (Nova Scotia, Canada). Lake and Reservoir Management, 31(2), 92–108.

http://doi.org/10.1080/10402381.2015.1013648

Gordon B. Fader. (2008). Surficial geology, Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia. Ottawa: Geological

Survey of Canada.

Grant, P. B. C., Johannessen, S. C., Macdonald, R. W., Yunker, M. B., Sanborn, M., Dangerfield,

N., … Ross, P. S. (2011). Environmental fractionation of PCBs and PBDEs during particle

transport as recorded by sediments in coastal waters. Environmental Toxicology &

Chemistry, 30(7), 1522–1532. http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.542

Greiner, R. (2014). Applicability of market-based instruments for safeguarding water quality in

coastal waterways: Case study for Darwin Harbour, Australia. Journal of Hydrology, 509,

1–12. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.019

Grifoll, M., Del Campo, A., Espino, M., Mader, J., González, M., & Borja, Á. (2013). Water renewal

and risk assessment of water pollution in semi-enclosed domains: Application to Bilbao

Harbour (Bay of Biscay). Journal of Marine Systems, 109–110, Supplement, S241–S251.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2011.07.010

Grifoll, M., Jordà, G., Borja, Á., & Espino, M. (2010). A new risk assessment method for water

quality degradation in harbour domains, using hydrodynamic models. Marine Pollution

Bulletin, 60(1), 69–78. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2009.08.030

Grifoll, M., Jordà, G., Espino, M., Romo, J., & García-Sotillo, M. (2011). A management system for

accidental water pollution risk in a harbour: The Barcelona case study. Journal of Marine

Systems, 88(1), 60–73. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2011.02.014

Halifax Regional Municipality. (2006). Harbour Solutions Project | Halifax.ca. Retrieved March 11,

2015, from http://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/

Health and Welfare Canada. (1990). Health risk determination: The challenge of health protec-

tion. Ottawa: Health Protection Branch. Health and Welfare Canada.

Health Canada. (2000). Health Canada decision-making framework for identifying, assessing, and

managing health risks. Ottawa: Health Canada.

Hellou, J., Williams, G., Parsons, M. B., & Scott, D. B. (2010). Evaluating the effects of

wastewater treatment on marine sediment chemistry in Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia.

Retrieved from http://DalSpace.library.dal.ca:8080/xmlui/handle/10222/25969

Hellou, J. Y., King, T. L., Steller, S. E., & Yeats, P. (2002). Trends in the distribution of PCBs com-

pared to PACs in sediments and mussels of Halifax harbour. Water Quality Research

Journal of Canada, 37(2), 413–428.

Hellou, J. Y., Steller, S., Zitko, V., Leonard, J., King, T., Milligan, T. G., & Yeats, P. (2002). Distribu-

tion of PACs in surficial sediments and bioavailability to mussels, Mytilus edulis of Hali-

fax Harbour. Marine Environmental Research, 53(4), 357–379.

http://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-1136(01)00125-8

He, Q., Peng, S., Zhai, J., & Xiao, H. (2011). Development and application of a water pollution

emergency response system for the Three Gorges Reservoir in the Yangtze River, China.

Journal of Environmental Sciences, 23(4), 595–600. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-

0742(10)60424-X

Hernández-Arana, H. A., Rowden, A. A., Attrill, M. J., Warwick, R. M., & Gold-Bouchot, G. (2003).

Large-scale environmental influences on the benthic macroinfauna of the southern Gulf

of Mexico. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 58(4), 825–841.

http://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7714(03)00188-4

HRM. (2014, May 21). HRM Economic Strategy | Halifax.ca. Retrieved June 17, 2015, from

http://www.halifax.ca/economicstrategy/

HRM, & DFO. (2001a, March 14). Preserving the Environment of Halifax Harbour - Workshop #2.

Retrieved from https://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/documents/workshop2_001.pdf

HRM, & DFO. (2001b, March 15). Preserving the Environment of Halifax Harbour - Call for Action.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Retrieved from

https://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/documents/workshop_summary_001.pdf

IMO. (2015a). International Maritime Organization - Convention on the Prevention of Marine

Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter. Retrieved October 30, 2015, from

http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/LCLP/Pages/default.aspx

IMO. (2015b). International Maritime Organization - Pollution Prevention. Retrieved October 30,

2015, from

http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/Pages/Default.asp

Jardine, C., Hrudey, S., Shortreed, J., Craig, L., Krewski, D., Furgal, C., & McColl, S. (2003). Risk

Management Frameworks for Human Health and Environmental Risks. Journal of Toxi-

cology and Environmental Health, Part B, 6(6), 569–718.

http://doi.org/10.1080/10937400390208608

Je, J.-G., Belan, T., Levings, C., & Koo, B. J. (2004). Changes in benthic communities along a pre-

sumed pollution gradient in Vancouver Harbour. Marine Environmental Research, 57(1–

2), 121–135. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-1136(03)00064-3

Jonker, M. T. O., Brils, J. M., Sinke, A. J. C., Murk, A. J., & Koelmans, A. A. (2006). Weathering and

toxicity of marine sediments contaminated with oils and polycyclic aromatic hydrocar-

bons. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 25(5), 1345–1353.

http://doi.org/10.1897/05-296R.1

JWEL, COAI, & ARTM. (2001). Halifax Harbour Solutions Project Environmental Screening (No.

13960-6027). 3 Spectacle Lake Drive, Dartmouth, NS B3B 1W8: Jacques Whitford Envi-

ronment Limited. Retrieved from

http://www.halifax.ca/harboursol/documents/ea_screening_report.pdf

Kelly, B. C., & Gobas, F. A. P. C. (2001). Bioaccumulation of Persistent Organic Pollutants in Li-

chen−Caribou−Wolf Food Chains of Canada’s Central and Western Arctic. Environmental

Science & Technology, 35(2), 325–334. http://doi.org/10.1021/es0011966

Kelly, D. G., Mattson, K. M., McDonald, C., Nielsen, K. S., & Weir, R. D. (2014). Environmental

radionuclide monitoring of Canadian harbours: a decade of analyses in support of due

diligence activities by the Royal Canadian Navy. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity,

138, 303–307. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2014.05.023

Koenig, J. E., Boucher, Y., Charlebois, R. L., Nesb, C., Zhaxybayeva, O., Bapteste, E., … Doolittle,

W. F. (2008). Integron-associated gene cassettes in Halifax Harbour: assessment of a

mobile gene pool in marine sediments. Environmental Microbiology, 10(4), 1024–1038.

http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2007.01524.x

Lachmuth, C. L., & Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. (2010). Ocean disposal in resident kill-

er whale (Orcinus orca) critical habitat science in support of risk management = Immer-

sion en mer dans les habitats essentiels des épaulard résidents (Orcinus orca) : la science

à l’appui de la gestion des risques. Ottawa: Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat =

Secrétariat canadien de consultation scientifique.

Long, E. R. (2006). Calculation and Uses of Mean Sediment Quality Guideline Quotients: A Criti-

cal Review. Environmental Science & Technology, 40(6), 1726–1736.

http://doi.org/10.1021/es058012d

Ludwig, J., Auman, H., Kurita, H., Ludwig, M., Campbell, L., Giesy, J., … Tatsukawa, R. (1993).

Caspian Tern Reproduction in the Saginaw Bay Ecosystem Following a 100-Year Flood

Event. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 19(1), 96–108.

Lyons, B. P., Thain, J. E., Stentiford, G. D., Hylland, K., Davies, I. M., & Vethaak, A. D. (2010). Us-

ing biological effects tools to define Good Environmental Status under the European Un-

ion Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 60(10), 1647–1651.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2010.06.005

MacKay, D. (1991). Multimedia environmental models : the fugacity approach. Chelsea, Mich:

Lewis Publishers.

Mamindy-Pajany, Y., Hamer, B., Roméo, M., Géret, F., Galgani, F., Durmiši, E., … Marmier, N.

(2011). The toxicity of composted sediments from Mediterranean ports evaluated by

several bioassays. Chemosphere, 82(3), 362–369.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.10.005

Mathalon, A., & Hill, P. (2014). Microplastic fibers in the intertidal ecosystem surrounding Hali-

fax Harbor, Nova Scotia. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 81(1), 69–79.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.02.018

McCarty, J. P., & Secord, A. L. (1999). Reproductive ecology of tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor)

with high levels of polychlorinated biphenyl contamination. Environmental Toxicology

and Chemistry, 18(7), 1433–1439. http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620180713

McCauley, D. J., DeGraeve, G. M., & Linton, T. K. (2000). Sediment quality guidelines and as-

sessment: overview and research needs. Environmental Science & Policy, 3, Supplement

1, 133–144. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-9011(00)00040-X

McKenzie-Mohr, D. (2000). New Ways to Promote Proenvironmental Behavior: Promoting Sus-

tainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing. Journal of So-

cial Issues, 56(3), 543–554. http://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00183

McLachlan, M. S., Czub, G., MacLeod, M., & Arnot, J. A. (2011). Bioaccumulation of Organic Con-

taminants in Humans: A Multimedia Perspective and the Importance of Biotransfor-

mation. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(1), 197–202.

http://doi.org/10.1021/es101000w

Mission Statement | Halifax.ca. (n.d.). Retrieved October 23, 2015, from

http://www.halifax.ca/hrwc/About%20HRWC/missionstatement.php

Morales-Caselles, C., Gao, W., Ross, P. S., & Fanning, L. (2015). Emerging Contaminants of Con-

cern in Canadian Harbours: A Case Study of Halifax Harbour. Vancouver Aquarium:

Ocean Pollution Research Program, Coastal Ocean Research Institute.

Morales-Caselles, C., Kalman, J., Micaelo, C., Ferreira, A. M., Vale, C., Riba, I., & DelValls, T. A.

(2008). Sediment contamination, bioavailability and toxicity of sediments affected by an

acute oil spill: Four years after the sinking of the tanker Prestige (2002). Chemosphere,

71(7), 1207–1213. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.12.013

Morales-Caselles, C., Riba, I., Sarasquete, C., & Ángel DelValls, T. (2008). Using a classical weight-

of-evidence approach for 4-years’ monitoring of the impact of an accidental oil spill on

sediment quality. Environment International, 34(4), 514–523.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2007.11.007

Morales, C. C., & Ross, P. S. (2015). Emerging Contaminants in Canadian Harbours: A Case of

Study Esquimalt and Victoria Harbours. Ocean Pollution Research Program, Vancouver

Aquarium Marine Science Centre.

Moreira, S. M., Lima, I., Ribeiro, R., & Guilhermino, L. (2006). Effects of estuarine sediment con-

tamination on feeding and on key physiological functions of the polychaete Hediste di-

versicolor: Laboratory and in situ assays. Aquatic Toxicology, 78(2), 186–201.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2006.03.001

Munawar, M., Dermott, R., McCarthy, L. H., Munawar, S. F., & Stam, H. A. van. (1999). A com-

parative bioassessment of sediment toxicity in lentic and lotic ecosystems of the North

American Great Lakes. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 2(4), 367–378.

http://doi.org/10.1080/14634989908656975

Murray R. Gregory. (1971). Distribution of benthonic foraminifera in Halifax Harbour, Nova Sco-

tia, Canada. Thesis PhD -- Dalhousie University.

Onorati, F., Mugnai, C., Pulcini, M., & Gabellini, M. (2012). A framework for the integrated as-

sessment and management of dredged materials in Italy: a case study based on the ap-

plication of Local Sediment Quality Guidelines. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 13(2),

474–487. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-012-0636-4

Qiao, M., Cai, C., Huang, Y., Liu, Y., Lin, A., & Zheng, Y. (2010). Characterization of soil heavy

metal contamination and potential health risk in metropolitan region of northern China.

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 172(1-4), 353–365.

http://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1339-1

Robinson, B. J., & Hellou, J. (2009). Biodegradation of endocrine disrupting compounds in har-

bour seawater and sediments. Science of The Total Environment, 407(21), 5713–5718.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.07.003

Robinson, B. J., Hui, J. P. M., Soo, E. C., & Hellou, J. (2009). Estrogenic compounds in seawater

and sediment from Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia, Canada. Environmental Toxicology and

Chemistry, 28(1), 18–25. http://doi.org/10.1897/08-203.1

Roose, J. L., Yocum, C. F., & Popelkova, H. (2011). Binding Stoichiometry and Affinity of the Man-

ganese-Stabilizing Protein Affects Redox Reactions on the Oxidizing Side of Photosystem

II. Biochemistry, 50(27), 5988–5998. http://doi.org/10.1021/bi2008068

Ruus, A., Allan, I. J., Ø xnevad, S., Schaanning, M. T., Borgå, K., Bakke, T., & Næ s, K. (2013). In vivo

bioaccumulation of contaminants from historically polluted sediments — Relation to bi-

oavailability estimates. Science of The Total Environment, 442, 336–343.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.060

Scott, D. B., Tobin, R., Williamson, M., Medioli, F. S., Latimer, J. S., Boothman, W. A., … Haury, V.

(2005). Pollution Monitoring in Two North American Estuaries: Historical Reconstruc-

tions Using Benthic Foraminifera. The Journal of Foraminiferal Research, 35(1), 65–82.

http://doi.org/10.2113/35.1.65

SFPUC. (2014). San Francisco Public Utilities Commission External Affairs /Strategic Sustainability

Annual Report FY2013-14 (No. FY2013-14). San Francisco Public Utilities Commission.

Retrieved from http://sfwater.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=6481

Shahidul Islam, M., & Tanaka, M. (2004). Impacts of pollution on coastal and marine ecosystems

including coastal and marine fisheries and approach for management: a review and syn-

thesis. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 48(7–8), 624–649.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2003.12.004

Shiliang. Shan. (2010). Numerical study of three-dimensional circulation and hydrography in Hali-

fax harbour using a nested-grid ocean circulation model. Thesis MSc--Dalhousie Univer-

sity.

Simpson, S. L., Batley, G. E., Chariton, A. A., Stauber, J. L., King, C. K., Chapman, J. C., … Maher, W.

A. (2010). Handbook for Sediment Quality Assessment. CSIRO: Bangor, NSW: Environ-

mental Contaminants Research. Retrieved from

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ross_Hyne/publication/228688298_Handbook_fo

r_sediment_quality_assessment/links/09e41508866da288d6000000.pdf

Souchère, V., Millair, L., Echeverria, J., Bousquet, F., Le Page, C., & Etienne, M. (2010). Co-

constructing with stakeholders a role-playing game to initiate collective management of

erosive runoff risks at the watershed scale. Environmental Modelling & Software, 25(11),

1359–1370. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.03.002

Spencer, K. L., Droppo, I. G., He, C., Grapentine, L., & Exall, K. (2011). A novel tracer technique

for the assessment of fine sediment dynamics in urban water management systems.

Water Research, 45(8), 2595–2606. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.02.012

Stewart, P. L., & White, L. (2001). A Review of Contaminants on the Scotian Shelf and in Adjacent

Coastal Waters: 1970 to 1995 (No. ISSN 0706-6457). Department of Fisheries and

Oceans. Retrieved from http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/261398.pdf

Swartz, R. C., Cole, F. A., Lamberson, J. O., Ferraro, S. P., Schults, D. W., Deben, W. A., … Ozretich,

R. J. (1994). Sediment toxicity, contamination and amphipod abundance at a DDT- and

dieldrin-contaminated site in San Francisco Bay. Environmental Toxicology and Chemis-

try, 13(6), 949–962. http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620130614

Tay, K.-L., Doe, K. G., Wade, S. J., Vaughan, D. A., Berrigan, R. E., & Moore, M. J. (1992). Sedi-

ment bioassessment in Halifax Harbour. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,

11(11), 1567–1581. http://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620111107

The Greater Halifax Partnership. (2014). The Halifax Index 2014: An Economic Gut Check with

Insights for Action (Halifax Index) (p. 54). The Greater Halifax Partnership. Retrieved

from halifaxindex.com

Tiller, R., Brekken, T., & Bailey, J. (2012). Norwegian aquaculture expansion and Integrated

Coastal Zone Management (ICZM): Simmering conflicts and competing claims. Marine

Policy, 36(5), 1086–1095. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.02.023

Timoney, K. P. (2007). A study of water and sediment quality as related to public health issues,

Fort Chipewyan, Alberta on behalf of the Nunee Health Board Society, Fort Chipewyan,

Alberta. Sherwood Park, Alta: Treeline Ecological Research.

Tixier, G., Rochfort, Q., Grapentine, L., Marsalek, J., & Lafont, M. (2012). Spatial and seasonal

toxicity in a stormwater management facility: Evidence obtained by adapting an inte-

grated sediment quality assessment approach. Water Research, 46(20), 6671–6682.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.12.031

Tolun, L. G., Okay, O. S., Gaines, A. F., Tolay, M., Tüfekçi, H., & Kıratlı, N. (2001). The pollution

status and the toxicity of surface sediments in İzmit Bay (Marmara Sea), Turkey. Envi-

ronment International, 26(3), 163–168. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-4120(00)00096-9

Treasury Board of Canada. (2011, June 20). Guide to Integrated Risk Management 1 / 4 [Gov-

ernment of Canada]. Retrieved November 5, 2015, from https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/tbs-

sct/rm-gr/guides/girm-ggir01-eng.asp

Tueros, I., Borja, Á., Larreta, J., Rodríguez, J. G., Valencia, V., & Millán, E. (2009). Integrating long-

term water and sediment pollution data, in assessing chemical status within the Euro-

pean Water Framework Directive. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 58(9), 1389–1400.

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2009.04.014

UNEP-WCMC. (2011). Marine and coastal ecosystem services: Valuation methods and their ap-

plication (UNEP-WCMC Biodiversity Series No. 33) (p. 46). 219 Huntington Road, Cam-

bridge CB3 0DL, United Kingdom: UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Re-

trieved from www.unep-wcmc.org

UNIDO. (2015). United Nations Industrial Development Organization - The Stockholm Conven-

tion. Retrieved October 30, 2015, from http://www.unido.org/en/what-we-

do/environment/capacity-building-for-the-implementation-of-multilateral-

environmental-agreements/the-stockholm-

convention.html?ucg_no64=1%2Fdata%2Fproject%2Fdata%2Findex.php

US EPA, O. (2012, March 6). Basic Information - Contaminated Sediments in Water. Retrieved

June 14, 2015, from http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/sediments/cs/aboutcs.cfm

Velmurugan, A., Swarnam, T. P., & Lal, R. (2015). Effect of land shaping on soil properties and

crop yield in tsunami inundated coastal soils of Southern Andaman Island. Agriculture,

Ecosystems & Environment, 206, 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.03.012

Wells, P. G. (1999). Biomonitoring the Health of Coastal Marine Ecosystems – The Roles and

Challenges of Microscale Toxicity Tests. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 39(1–12), 39–47.

http://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(99)00120-4

Wells, P. G., Depledge, M. H., Butler, J. N., Manock, J. J., & Knap, A. H. (2001). Rapid Toxicity As-

sessment and Biomonitoring of Marine Contaminants — Exploiting the Potential of Rap-

id Biomarker Assays and Microscale Toxicity Tests. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 42(10),

799–804. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(01)00054-6

Wenning, R. J. (2005). Use of Sediment Quality Guidelines and Related Tools for the Assessment

of Contaminated Sediments. SETAC.

Willford, W. A., Mac, M. J., & Hesselberg, R. J. (1987). Assessing the bioaccumulation of contam-

inants from sediments by fish and other aquatic organisms. Hydrobiologia, 149(1), 107–

111. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00048651

Williams, G. (2010). Monitoring and evaluating remediation efforts in Halifax Harbour (Master’s

Thesis). Dalhousie University.

Winters, G. V., & Atlantic Geoscience Centre. (1991). Inorganic geochemical data for surface

sediments from Halifax Inlet. Dartmouth, NS: Atlantic Geoscience Centre, Energy, Mines

and Resources, Bedford Institute of Oceanography.

Wiseman, C. L. S., & Gobas, F. A. P. C. (2002). Balancing risks in the management of contaminat-

ed first nations fisheries. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 12(4),

331–342. http://doi.org/10.1080/0960312021000056438

APPENDIX

Appendix 1: A brief description of priority contaminants of concern in harbours, including existence or not of Canadian Sedi- ment Quality Guidelines for the protection of aquatic life CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs

Heavy metals occur natu- Metals can accumulate in marine life and Regulations in food and Some rally, but are also products can be locally problematic. Metals vary in environmental guidelines or by-products of human their toxic effects. Some effects include activities. Common an- oxidative stress and carcinogenicity. For thropogenic sources in- example lead interferes with a variety of Trace Metals clude mining and industrial body processes and is toxic to many or- wastes, vehicle emissions, gans and tissues including the heart, lead-acid batteries, fertiliz- bones, intestines, kidneys, and reproduc- ers, paints and treated tive and nervous systems. The organome- woods. tallic forms methylmercury and tetraethyl lead can be extremely toxic.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hy- There exist thousands of PAHs in the envi- CEPA 1999 Schedule 1 - Total, some drocarbons are often by- ronment, with individual PAHs varying in List of Toxic Substances: congeners products of petroleum pro- behaviour. Lighter PAH compounds are new restrictions in Eu- cessing or combustion; generally more water soluble and can rope (ECHA: EU No some PAHs are used to therefore be more bioavailable to aquatic 1272/2013). make dyes, plastics, and life where they may pose risk of acute tox- pesticides. Forest fires and icity. However, breakdown times are much prairie fires, agricultural shorter than for heavier compounds. PAHs PAHs burning, and fossil-fuels with more than four rings, being less vola- are the major contributors tile and soluble, favor adherence to solid of PAHs to the environ- particles. They are generally found in soil ment. and sediment as complex mixtures. Alkyl- ated PAHs are more persistent than their parent PAHs. Many of these compounds are highly carcinogenic at relatively low levels. The heavier PAH compounds tend to be associated with more chronic health

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs effects. US EPA has identified 16 priority PAHs that are thought to be carcinogenic through multiple routes of exposure, and can affect the immune, reproductive, nervous and endocrine systems. The most toxic PAH is benzo(a)pyrene

Polychlorinated biphenyls Their persistence in the environment cor- Listed under Annex A Total, some have been used as heat ex- responds to the degree of chlorination, and with specific exemptions congeners change fluids, in electric half-lives can vary from weeks to decades. and under Annex C of the transformers and capaci- Of the 209 different types of PCBs, 13 Stockholm Convention. tors, and as additives in exhibit a dioxin-like toxicity. PCBs are The import, manufacture, paint, carbonless copy pa- toxic to fish, causing reproductive failures and sale (for re-use) of per, and plastics. at relatively low doses. Large numbers of PCBs were made illegal people have been exposed to low to mod- in Canada in 1977 and erate levels of PCBs through food contam- release to the environ- ination. Since PCBs are persistent, bioac- ment of PCBs was made cumulative and toxic, they accumulate in illegal in 1985. However, aquatic food webs and attain high levels in Canadian legislation has some marine mammals. PCBs have been allowed owners of PCB associated with toxic effects in marine equipment to continue PCBs mammals such as endocrine disruption, using PCB equipment which can cause impairment of reproduc- until the end of its service tion, development, and other hormonally life. The storage of PCBs mediated processes, and immunotoxicity, has been regulated since giving rise to an increased susceptibility to 1988. Handling, transport infectious diseases and cancers. and destruction of PCBs are also regulated, mostly under provincial regulations. Canada is signatory to several international agreements on the phase- out of a number of persistent toxic substances including PCBs. Environ- 73

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs ment Canada has therefore repealed the Chloro- biphenyls Regulations and the Storage of PCB Material Regulations on September 5, 2008 and made the PCB Regula- tions under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999) that set specific dates for the destruction of PCBs in service and in storage.

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p- There are 75 different dioxins, of which Listed under Annex C of Total dioxins are produced unin- seven are considered to be of concern. the Stockholm Conven- tentionally due to incom- High capacity to accumulate in biological tion. Dioxins and furans plete combustion, as well tissues. Dioxins have been associated with are slated for virtual elim- during the manufacture of a number of adverse effects in humans, ination under the Canadi- pesticides and other chlo- including immune and enzyme disorders an Environmental Protec- rinated substances. They and chloracne, and they are classified as tion Act, the federal Tox- are emitted from the low- possible human carcinogens. ic Substances Manage- temperature incineration of ment Policy and the hospital, municipal, and CCME Policy for the PCDDs hazardous wastes, and also Management of Toxic from automobile emis- Substances. sions, peat, coal, and burning of salt laden wood in coastal pulp and paper boilers, iron sintering and electric arc furnace steel manufacturing. There were releases of large amounts of dioxins from pulp and paper mills in Canada prior 74

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs to regulations restricting the use of elemental liquid chlorine.

Polychlorinated dibenzofu- Furans persist in the environment for long Listed under Annex C of Total rans are produced uninten- periods. High capacity to accumulate in the Stockholm Conven- tionally from many of the biological tissues. Furans are structurally tion. Dioxins and furans same processes that pro- similar to dioxins and share many of their are slated for virtual elim- duce dioxins, and also dur- toxic effects. There are 135 different types, ination under the Canadi- ing the production of and their toxicity varies. Furans are classi- an Environmental Protec- PCBs. They have been de- fied as possible human carcinogens. Food, tion Act, the federal Tox- tected in emissions from particularly animal products, is the major ic Substances Manage- PCDFs waste incinerators, auto- source of exposure for humans. Furans ment Policy and the mobiles and from pulp have also been detected in breast-fed in- CCME Policy for the mills. There were releases fants. Management of Toxic of large amounts of dioxins Substances. from pulp and paper mills in Canada prior to regulations restricting the use of elemental liquid chlorine.

Brominated Flame Retard- Many of the BFRs are considered toxic, PBDEs "toxic", as de- NO ants appear in manufac- persistent and bioaccumulative. Largely fined under the Canadian tured materials, such as distributed in organisms (including marine Environmental Protection furnishings, electronics, mammals) from various geographic re- Act, 1999. Regulations plastics and textiles; a ma- gions. Long-range atmospheric transport prohibit the manufacture jor source is diffuse leach- and deposition. PBDEs bioaccumulate in of all PBDEs in Canada, Brominated ing from products into blood, breast milk, and fat tissues. Health and restricting the import, Flame Retardants wastewater streams from effects of PBDE exposure include damage use and sale of PBDEs users, households and in- to the neurological, reproductive, immune, found in commercial dustries. and hormonal systems. The most widely mixtures of greatest con- used chemical in this group, decaBDE, is cern (Penta- and OctaB- also a suspected carcinogen. HBCD causes DE). DecaBDE is under reproductive toxicity. TBBPA degrades to assessment. Stockholm bisphenol A and to TBBPA dimethyl Convention on Persistent

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs ether; TBBPA has demonstrated toxicity Organic Pollutants decid- in a variety of aquatic and terrestrial spe- ed in May 2013 to list cies, its chronic toxicity is predicted at hexabromocyclododecane very low concentrations. in Annex A (for elimina- tion) to the Convention with specific exemptions. TBBPA is currently in the pre-registration phase of REACH. The Gov- ernment of Canada is considering the implementation of risk management measures to reduce releases of TBBPA from industrial source if required, while maintaining the use of TBBPA where deemed necessary

Perfluorooctane sulfonic PFCs are persistent in the environment. Added to Annex B of the NO acid (PFOS) and its salts, PFOA and PFOS are considered to be re- Stockholm Convention perfluorooctane sulfonyl sistant to degradation in soil. Bioaccumu- on Persistent Organic fluoride and Perfluorooc- late and persist in protein-rich compart- Pollutants in May 2009. tanoic acid (PFOA) are ments of fish, birds, and marine mammals. EPA has designated rules known as perfluorinated PFCs are toxic including neonatal mortali- for the use of PFCs. EU compounds. They can be ty. Studies of PFOA indicate that it can and other countries de- PFCs found in electronic parts, cause several types of tumors and neonatal veloping strategies to re- firefighting foam, photo death and may have toxic effects on the duce their use. The Gov- imaging, hydraulic fluids immune, liver, and endocrine systems. ernment of Canada added and textiles. PFOS was the PFOS, its salts, and its key ingredient in Scotch- precursors to the Toxic gard, a fabric protector Substances List under made by 3M, and numer- Schedule 1 of the Cana-

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs ous stain repellents. dian Environmental Pro- tection Act, 1999.

Alkylphenols including Alkylphenols can take months or longer to European Union and NO nonylphenol, are used to degrade in surface waters, soils, and sedi- Canada have banned the make alkylphenol ethox- ments. Long distances transportation and use of nonylphenol eth- ylates (APEs), chemical global reach. Alkylphenols are endocrine oxylates (NPEs) in deter- compounds that are mainly disruptors due to their ability to mimic gents used as synthetic surfac- estrogen and in turn disrupt the natural Alkylphenols tants used in detergents and balance of hormones in affected organ- cleaning products. Used as isms. Prenatal and perinatal exposure to antioxidants, oil additives, nonylphenol has been linked with devel- detergents, emulsifiers, and opmental abnormalities. Nonylphenol ex- solubilizers, precursors of posure has also been associated with breast non-ionic surfactants, cos- cancer. metic, pesticides.

Organochlorine Pesticides; Despite restrictions and bans on the use of Nine of the 12 most haz- Some also known as legacy pes- many organochlorine pesticides in the ardous persistent organic ticides; they were widely 1970s and 1980s, they continue to persist pollutants (POPs) target- used in agriculture and pest in the environment today. Organochlorine ed by the Stockholm control until research and pesticides are hydrophobic, lipophilic and Convention in 2001 are public concern regarding extremely stable. Toxicity appears to be OC pesticides. the hazards of their use led via disruption of neural function and spe- OCPs to government restrictions cific disturbances vary by chemistry. Stud- and bans. Despite re- ies support both acute and chronic effects strictions and bans on the of OC pesticides, potentially via damage use of many organochlo- to reproductive and neurological functions, rine pesticides in the 1970s carcinogenesis and endocrine disruption and 1980s, they continue to persist in the environment today.

Neonicotinoid During the 1970s and Long-term persistence in soil and water. Temporary suspensions NO pesticides 1980s after the detrimental The neonicotinoids show reduced toxicity and bans on the use of

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs effects of pesticides like compared to previously used organophos- different neonicotinoids DDT became known, OC phate and carbamate insecticides. The use in several countries. pesticides were replaced of neonicotinoids was linked in a range of with less persistent pesti- studies to a number of adverse ecological cides. These new pesticides effects, including honey-bee colony col- had different physical- lapse disorder (CCD) and loss of birds due chemicals properties than to reduction in insect populations. OCs and different environmental fates.

Current use pesticides. Current use pesticides are generally more Some banned in the EU NO target specific and are less persistent in the environment than legacy pesticides. They may be more acutely toxic than old pesticides. Studies have shown that exposure to OP pesticides can affect the neurological CUP and immune systems in animals. Once in the body, many OP compounds metabolize into dialkyl phosphate metabolites. Atra- zine is linked to ovarian cancer and can be toxic to freshwater fish, invertebrates, and aquatic plants.

Tributyltins is a pesticidal Highly persistent, bioaccumulative and Completely banned in NO compound applied to the biomagnifies in the food chain. Compared 2008 by the International hulls of ships and small to earlier copper-containing antifouling Convention on the Con- boats to protect against an coatings, TBT was more toxic to fouling trol of Harmful Anti- accumulation of barnacles organisms and lasted longer. Toxic effects fouling Systems on Ships and other fouling organ- at all trophic levels. Endocrine disruptive of the International Mari- TBTs isms on underwater surfac- (i.e. masculinization of gastropods), it af- time Organization. es. TBT is one of a class of fects immune system in vertebrates. compounds called organotins and was introduced in the 1960s. Ships painted with TBT needed repaint-

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs ing every 4-5 years.

Plastics that contain They will tend to persist for long periods Lower-molecular-weight NO phthalates are commonly in anaerobic sediments. Endocrine disrup- phthalates (3-6 carbon used in applications that tors, teratogenic effects, mortality. atoms in their backbone) include building materials, are being gradually re- clothing, cosmetics, per- placed in many products Phthalate esters fumes, food packaging, in the United States, Can- toys, and vinyl products; ada, and European Union primarily used to make over health concerns. polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or vinyl flexible and pliant

Short-Chain Chlorinated They can remain in the environment for a CEPA 1999 Schedule 1 - NO Paraffins (SCCP)s are used significant amount of time and can bioac- List of Toxic Substances. as lubricants and coolants cumulate in animal tissues, increasing the The EU has restricted in metal cutting and metal probability and duration of exposure. Even SCCP use in metalwork- forming operations and as relatively small releases of these chemicals ing fluids. Currently EPA secondary plasticizers and from individual manufacturing, pro- is taking an action plan, flame retardants in plastics. cessing, or waste management facilities under which regulations Chlorinated par- have the potential to accumulate over time to restrict or even ban all affins to higher levels and cause significant ad- short-chain paraffins (to- verse impacts on the environment. They gether with eight are classified as toxic to aquatic organ- phthalates, and two types isms. of perfluorinated compounds: perfluorinated sulfonates and perfluoro- alkyl carboxylates) are being considered.

Pharmaceuticals and Per- Although some degrade quickly, they can BPA considered "toxic NO sonal Care Products get be considered pseudo-persistent in the en- substance” and added it PPCP into the marine environ- vironment because of continual inputs. to schedule 1 of the Ca- ment from wastewaters The ability of triclosan (and others) to bio- nadian Environmental from areas of intense ur- accumulate is affected by its ionization Protection Act, 1999. The

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs banization and animal pro- state in different environmental conditions. Risk Assessment by EC duction. Their toxicity varies, and it can affect proposed that triclosan hormone levels, carcinogenicity, etc. meets the criterion as set Triclosan is toxic to aquatic bacteria at out under paragraph 64(a) levels found in the environment. It is high- of CEPA 1999; it was ly toxic to various types of algae and has also proposed that triclo- the potential to affect the structure of algal san meets the criterion for communities, particularly immediately bioaccumulation but not downstream of effluents from wastewater the criteria for persistence treatment facilities that treat household as set out in the Persis- wastewaters. Triclosan has been observed tence and Bioaccumula- in multiple organisms, including algae tion Regulations (Canada aquatic blackworms, fish and dolphins. 2000).

Micro-plastics have a Their persistency is high. Microplastics No regulations. Some NO range of compositions and can be ingested by marine organisms. En- companies have promised can be demarcated by us- tanglement and ingestion with the poten- a voluntary phase-out of age and origin as: i) tial for: physical disruption and abrasion; plastic microbeads. Some ‘primary’, pellets used as a toxicity of chemicals in the plastic; and, US Sates (e.g. Michigan) feedstock in the plastics toxicity of absorbed persistent, bioaccu- are banning microbead- industry, and in certain mulative and toxic (PBT) substances. containing products. applications such as abra- sives; and, ii) ‘secondary’, fragments resulting from Microplastics the degradation and breakdown of larger items. Arti- ficial particles < 5mm. wastewaters (Land-based sources are considered to contribute the largest input of plastics), marine litter, shipping, fishing and the military transport. Micro- plastic particles can arise through four separate pro- 80

CCME CONTAMINANT SOURCE PERSISTENCE AND TOXICITY LEGISLATION SQGs cesses: i) deterioration of larger plastic fragments, cordage and films over time, with or without assistance from UV radiation, mechanical forces in the seas (e.g. wave action, grinding on high energy shorelines), or through biological activity (e.g. bor- ing, shredding and grinding by marine organisms); ii) direct release of micro particles (e.g. scrubs and abra- sives in household and personal care products, shot- blasting ship hulls and industrial cleaning products respectively, grinding or milling waste) into waterways and via urban wastewater treatment; iii) accidental loss of industrial raw materials (e.g. prefab- ricated plastics in the form of pellets or powders used to make plastic articles), during transport or trans- shipment, at sea or into surface waterways; iv) discharge of macerated wastes, e.g. sewage sludge. (Sources: CCME, 1998; Morales-Caselles et al., 2015)